User:Apkrishel/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: Umayyad conquest of Hispania
 * I chose to evaluate this article because I'm very interested in the Umayyad conquest in general and tend to focus on Spanish history when researching Western/European history.

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? Not as much
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Not very
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? A bit too concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? The latest citation is from 2012. Luckily, all this happened 1300 to 1200 years ago, so not much has changed.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Not enough citations in "aftermath" (2)

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? "which may have added greatly to the revenue of the Umayyad governors and the caliph of Damascus, by increasingly imposing the vectigalia on the former" supposition
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not really
 * 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? No- "Aftermath" only had 2 citations
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Holy moly no.
 * Are the sources current? Within 2012
 * 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? A little bit messy
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * 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? A few
 * Are images well-captioned? Not really
 * 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? Word choice (Hispania vs. Iberia, Muslim vs. Moor), moving around references, fighting about who's deleting what.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Level 5, yes quite a few (history, Europe, etc.)
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Much less focus on intelligence/education/culture, more on government/administration

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

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: