User:BLeverich/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: Korea
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen this article because I am interested in Korean History

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The Lead includes an introductory sentence that is concise and describes clearly the articles topic. It also includes descriptions of the major sections and does not seem to include information that is not in the article. For the topic chosen, the article does a good job of concisely over viewing what the article will be about.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The articles content is on topic. It starts in Korea's formation and prehistory and concisely highlights large (important) events in the timeline of Korea itself. This article is constantly being edited and is up to date; the last time it was updated was 10/28/2019. I think some content is definitely missing. For instance in the talk page many new events in Korea are unfolding so many wiki editors have proposed new information to add such as music, political events, ect. But I feel that the literature section needs citation.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article has a neutral air, and lists the facts accordingly. In the food section of the article I felt as if the writing, although cited, seemed like it was persuading the reader to also agree that Korean food is extremely healthy.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
I would say 99.9% of the facts in the article are backed by reliable secondary source info but some of the sources are older and have not been updated (or no new info on the topic has been reliably published). The links in the article do work and reflect available topic literature but some need to be re visited and possibly updated with newer current sources.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article itself is well written even though so many different people are working on the article. I did not see any grammatical or spelling errors (but I am not the best at proofreading). I think the section organization is well done. The sections flow well with each other starting from prehistory and heading forward into modern times. I think some sections such as literature, music, and food need updating and more information added.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
The article includes many images that I feel definitely help the reader understand specific talking points. For instance the first documented Korean Maritime Flag photo is added in the article that adheres to the copyright regulations of wikipedia and are all well captioned.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
On the talk page there are many discussions about needing citations for sections (ex: education) and to beware of sounding too persuading. Also discussions on what new information should be added and if it is going to add to the quality of the article. The article has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Geography and has been rated as C-Class article. I think wikipedia discusses the topic in more of a research point of view. Everyone in the discussions on the talk pages are discussing more as historians on the topic.

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?

Overall evaluation
The article's overall status is a C-Class article of top importance. I think the strengths of this article are the amount of good quality secondary sources and the concise way in which it details the important key events of Korea itself. I think it can be improved by added more reliable info in certain sections and add citations where they are missing.

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: Talk:Korea