User:Angmadera0509/Evaluate an Article

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


 * Name of article: Damsel in Distress
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. It's just such an interesting topic to me because it's such a prevalent saying and it can literally be seen everywhere in movies, TV shows, and video games.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is pretty concise and gets to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? I feel like since the damsel in distress representation was more prevalent in westernized culture, then it would sort of make sense as to why the underrepresented population does not get to be addressed in this topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I just noticed that one particular explanation of a game's use of damsel in distress was more thorough and detailed than the other.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Not really.

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? The sources are a little outdated, but I think it's to show how prevalent this was in the past, so they took many historical sources into consideration.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, the sources have included a lot of people
 * 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? Yes.
 * 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? Yes.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Mary Jane Watson, Taming of the Shrew analogies, Perils of Pauline, and why someone added Saving Private Ryan to the list.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes, it is part of multiple projects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It's more history oriented and elapses to more general pop culture ideologies rather than personal experiences.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is pretty good so far, but not complete.
 * What are the article's strengths? Historical representation. Speaks a lot about history.
 * How can the article be improved? By having more citations.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I think the article is just a bit underdeveloped and just requires more sources and citations, but the overall message is clear.

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: