User:Bdbrand77/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:
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

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 introductory sentence does describe the article's topic, but the lead doesn't outline the main sections and it does include information not presented in the body of the article (e.g. the tribal leu style).

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
''Admittedly I'm not well qualified to assess whether the content is up to date, but it does all seem relevant. There is a major piece of content that is missing, namely any reference to Bernart's music! Given the fraught issues of gender inequities and representation of women in troubadour poetry, moreover, this article should probably address the issue of equity gaps (although it doesn't).''

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 seems to adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines on neutrality. It doesn't obviously favor particular viewpoints.''

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Many of the facts are not backed up with reliable secondary sources and indeed many of the sources cited are tertiary. Few could really be described as current and its hard to say they represent a diverse spectrum of authors. The links seem to work fine.

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 should be divided into small sections with their own headings. "Biography" seems a bit broad. And, as noted above, the lead contains information not explored in the body.

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 images is appealing but it doesn't necessarily enhance the understanding of the topic. The prose could engage with the image more.''

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
''The article is related to three Wikiprojects but it doesn't seem to be rated. The article itself is heavily focused on Bernart's biography, not his music or poetry. There doesn't seem to be much of a conversation at all.''

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
''There's some useful information in the article, but overall it has some major flaws, both due to its lack of significant content and because of organizational problems. It could be expanded and its structure could be clarified.''

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: