User:Analise18/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article- Sioux Wars
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (link) Sioux Wars
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I'm evaluating this article because I am creating a Wiki page about the Scalp Dance preformed by various native tribes. I wanted to research the Sioux Wars and the war tactics used by the Sioux to see if I could find first hand accounts of scalping occurring during conflicts. I picked these wars specifically to start with because they happened in relatively recent history (1840's-1890's), so I figured I could find more documentation on it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, it's concise and provides extensions on information so you can get more details.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Somewhat. It describes the Sioux Wars as a "series of conflicts" and then the content is the different battles listed.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think the lead is concise. It told me what the page was about without being an entire paragraph.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, all of the content is about the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * I'd say the content is up-to-date. The newest reference in their bibliography was from 2006.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The final outcomes of the war is missing. It tells of all the conflicts and battles, but doesn't provide a section for a conclusion.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes, I'd say native tribes on a whole are historically underrepresented.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, it doesn't provide the writers opinion.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I'd say both sides are equally represented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Not all of them
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not many, maybe some punctuation errors. The "Colorado War" Section seemed poorly formatted, though.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Not enough pictures for me.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The one image they provided is.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * I guess so.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * This page has a fairly active talk page
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article is important to 4 different WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It's very cut and dry and doesn't try to present any myths surrounding the event.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It's overall status is good.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Concise information and it gets the overall topic across.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More representation and firsthand accounts from both sides. More pictures
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is underdeveloped in my opinion. It needs more direct quotes and pictures. I'd like to hear about the battles from the survivors that fought in them.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: