User:Avprnow/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Love You Forever

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen Love You Forever to practice evaluating Wikipedia articles, and because this a book I read as a child that holds meaning to me. I also plan to edit this article for the final Wikipedia Project.

Evaluate the article
At first glance, the Wikipedia page dedicated to Love You Forever appears well-rounded and contains all critical information. However, after a second read, it seems to be a little redundant. The lead section introduces the book, but in a way that is a shortened plot summary, so the following "Story" section repeats the same information. I think it would be important to mention the attraction to the book and the impact it had on society.

The content of the page is relevant and important for understanding the content of the book, related information about the author, and its presence in other media.

The "Story" section I think should be changed to "Plot" and should mention that the mother dies at the end of the children's novel because it is not necessarily implied or easy to pick up on.

The "Creation" section would be better titled "Background" and could use additional information regarding the purpose and motivation behind the author's decision to write this novel. I also think it would be interesting to add a section about the imagery and illustrations in the book and the illustrator herself.

The "Reception" section is well written, I do think it would be interesting to explore and potentially add more information (if there is more) about how the book is negatively viewed.

The article, although Start Class, includes information on publishing, an image of the book cover, and an appropriate amount of citations (all work but one) for the content included. The article is generally balanced and well-toned with little or no bias, however, I found the word choice of "exasperating behavior" to be a bit extreme for describing childhood-like behavior.

After reviewing the talk page, I found that the page editors have had controversy and differences in view about whether to classify this as a children's book, although it is a part of the wiki-project children's lit. Additionally, if the mother did actually die (which I previously understood that she did). It seems as though it was also a victim of vandalism and has been reverted once to its "best form."