User:Bchvz123/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Madagascar (2005 film))

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(I chose this article because I always enjoyed this film. It was a bit lengthy but there is still more information to add)

Evaluate the article
1.     Does the lead include an introduction sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article’s topic? Yes, It gives the background of the movie on when it was created, who the voice actors are, and a bit of controversy about the movie, but at the end of everything the movie became a huge success.

2.    Does the lead include a brief description of the article’s major sections? Yes, It gives a brief summary of the movie, as well as it talks about the voice actors and gives a small introduction about them and the character they voice.

3.    Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn’t) Yes, in the lead it had mentioned a controversy about the movie but nowhere in the article did it explain what exactly that controversy is.

4.    Is the lead concise, or is it overly detailed? I would say it is concise, most of the points that were said on the lead went over it in detail when it came to their own section.

Content:

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Questions about Content:
1.     Is the article’s content relevant to the topic? The name of the article is called “Madagascar 2005” and the author does stay in track and talks about the movie.

2.    Is the content up to date? Yes, it was on April 17, 2023

3.    Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is content missing, in the beginning, the author mentioned a controversy about the film but the author never brought up what exactly that controversy was.

4.    Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia‘s equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Questions about Tone and Balance:

1.     Is the article neutral? Not sure, the author did mention there was a controversy but did not address what is was

2.    Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, everything the author was talking about was backed up with facts, except like how I said, the controversy the author had mentioned.

3.    Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented? No, everything seems equally talked about

4.    Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?

5.    Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, this is not a persuading topic, just mentioning what this film is about.

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand when possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

Questions about Sources and References:
1.     Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes

2.    Are the sources thorough – i.e., do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, they do

3.    Are the sources current? There are sources that are all the way back from the year 2010, and there are updated sources from the year 2022

4.    Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors?

5.    Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

6.    Are there better sources available such as peer reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

7.    Check a few links. Do they work? Some do some don’, a lot of the sources that are linked in the sources section, the information just repeats its self. Personally don’t believe it needs that many sources.

Questions for Organization and Writing Quality
1.     Is the article well written – i.e. is it concise, clear, and easy-to-read? It is easy to read, it is divided into sections where it tells the reader what exactly this section is about.

2.    Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, it does not

3.    Is the article well-organized – i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes this article is broken down into sections

Images and Media:
1.     Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Just two images

2.    Are images well captioned? The one about the film is, the one about the actor, David Schwimmer, is not well captioned.

3.    Do all images adhere to Wikipedia ‘s copyright regulations? Yes

4.    Are the images laid out in a visually-appealing way? Yes they are

Talk Page Discussion:
The article’s Talk Page - and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there - can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn’t think of.

Questions for Talk Page Discussion:
1.     What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The author mentioned a controversy but never said what that controversy was

2.    How is the article rated? C- class

3.    Is it a part of any wiki projects? Yes, of 5 projects

Questions for Overall Impressions:
1.     What is the article ‘s overall status? This article is not too long

2.    What are the article’s strengths? It is well-sectioned and deeply talked about. It is backed up with facts, not opinions

3.    How can the article be improved? The only thing was just the controversy. Probably the author should had mentioned what that controversy was

4.    How would you assess the article’s completeness – i.e. is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is developed. Well written article