User:Ashleystump/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Kafka on the Shore.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it reviews a book that I had already been interested in reading. Haruki Murakami is an extremely prominent Japanese writer in the 20th and 21st centuries, and I feel that going into depth about his novels is important in understanding why this is the case. The article seems to provide a good amount of information--however, is somewhat short and lacks in details.

Evaluate the article
Lead section introduces the article neutrally, is concise, and all information is included in the article. I would do some rearranging of sentences in the lead section. Content is relevant relatively up to date, but could use some newer sources and input, as the sources do not date past 2008. Some sections are lengthier than others (i.e. plot summary and characters sections vs. the reception section, which is only three sentences), and therefore could use some further elaboration. As for tone, the article is, to me, unbiased. However, there is no indication of public critiques on the novel, which I feel should be included in order to further understand its reception. Sources are current but could use some updating. They consist mostly of book reviews, as the article is less history-based than it is based on the reception of the book. All links, except one, are accessible. It is well organized and broken into clear sections. Image of the first edition book cover is captioned and I don't think there needs to be more images. We have yet to discuss this book in class, and I have yet to read it, but most of the talk on the Talk page discusses the lack of description in understanding the themes of the novel, as well as edits made based on misunderstandings. Overall, I think this article is developed, but could use more detailed, in-depth, and up-to-date information--especially regarding themes and possible negative reception.