User:Bnl11/sandbox

= July 15th, 2020, Evaluate an article exercise: "Bobrisky" = This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Bobrisky
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have chosen to evaluate this article on Bobrisky because it is pretty underdeveloped (though it references a lot of sources, the body/length of the article is quite small--I think a lot of these sources are used to verify/cite the same facts). After a quick google search, I found that there has been a decent amount of media coverage on Bobrisky in the past month, and the significant information that has surfaced has not been added to the article. I would also like to add an image of Bobrisky to the infobox. Additionally, there is some significant non-cited statements that could either be deleted or have references added. At some point, I think the article does need to include more background on the controversy surrounding Bobrisky's platform; however, the way in which this controversy is introduced in the current version of the article is not backed up by strong sources or specific examples which it would benefit from having.

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 (write out your thoughts here)
Based on the breadth of the article, I do think the lead somewhat accurately describes the topic. If the article were more developed, the lead would need to be a lot more informative. The second half of the first sentence, "Nigeria, a country with no LGBT rights," however, asserts a blanket statement with no reference. This not only hurts the credibility of the article, but the statements further in the article that build upon this assertion lose their emphasis and are not cited as well.

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 (write out your thoughts here)
Outside of the non-neutral statements, the content of the article does not appear to be wrong; however, as I discovered after a quick google search, it is not up to date and is missing a lot of current relevant information.

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 (write out your thoughts here)
There are several non-neutral statements (regarding judgement of Bobrisky and the laws/society in Nigeria) that are not cited to a source. I think the same sentiment of statements could be added in a more neutral way, but it would require finding the proper sources, and I am not sure they exist (particularly from sources Wikipedia would deem reliable).

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 (write out your thoughts here)
Several statements are not cited to any source. The sources are current and the links work; however, it is a bit unclear to me if all of the sources would be deemed reliable under WIkipedia's guidelines.

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 (write out your thoughts here)
Though it is super short, the limited information contained in the article seems to be well-organized.

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 (write out your thoughts here)
There are no images in the article, and I think it would really benefit from having an updated image of Bobrisky, since she is the topic of the article. (I tried to find and upload and image, but was unsure of the copyright status of the images I found.)

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 (write out your thoughts here)
There was a previous discussion about the articles potential deletion in 2016. There were several disheartening statements (disheartening to me, that is) made in this discussion as well as the use of the incorrect pronouns of the subject. One user was particularly adamant that the article was an unnecessary (and almost disgraceful) presence on Wikipedia, stating: "Looks like gossip about some nobody to me... Even if the refs are legit, who cares?" Another user in faorr of the page's deletion and said: "On a personal note, for security reasons, Wikipedia can do without keeping a sensationalist article that is barely notable on someone with hormone deficiencies (I mean this not in terms of his sexual preference but rather his display of feminine characteristics) residing in a conservative country like Nigeria. It is not worth the risk, it isn't safe for him for Wikipedia to further publicize him." Not only does this user use the wrong pronouns, they assume their stance based on a personal judgement/prediction of the feelings of a class of people they are not a part of. Another user who was more in favor of the article (though still not very opposed to it's removal) said that it could be kept "as a way of encouraging new Nigerian editors to remain on Wikipedia," which I thought was a more neutral and important evaluation of the article because it encourages more diversity and representation among the users of the platform.

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 (write out your thoughts here)
The article is in need of much improvement. Many of the statements in the article need to be verified/cited or removed. I think there is a way to get more of the opinion/judgement-based statements into the article as they are very much part of the factual narrative arc of Bobrisky's life; it just needs to be done in a more evidence-based and neutral-toned way. There is a lot of further development and current/updated information this article could use, and I might be interested in doing the research to add it.

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:

= July 16th, 2020 Evaluating an Articles Framework: The Manny Files =

Lead Section
Yes, this article has a lead section, but it is very thin and inadequate. It does let you know the subject of the article, but does not really let you know what to expect coming up.

Background
No, this article does not have a background section. In the lead section here is one sentence about how the book came to be, but more information is needed regarding the author and his exigence for writing the book. It could also potentially include how long it took the author to write the book/how it changed over time before it's publication.

Summary
Practically the whole body of the article is plot synopsis (separated into two sections: plot introduction and plot summary). While a brief summary is present, none of the information provided is cited, making it seem that all the information is original research/thoughts from the author if the article, who likely just finished reading the novel. In the plot summary, the author of the article also makes some seemingly factual statements that are actually interpretations, having taken parts of the book a step further, which, though analytical, is not fitting for Wikipedia.

Genre
No, this article does not have a genre section. It would benefit from having information about the style of the book, its intended audience, and how it fits within the author's repertoire.

Analysis
No, this article does not have an analysis section. The author of the article does try to provide some analytical statements, but they are not cited from a source and are likely the author's own observations/conclusions. Thee article would benefit from informations about how published reviewers have received and interpreted the book.

Publication
No, this article does not have a publication section. In the lead section it mentions the publication year and publisher. It would benefit from information about publication formats, cover art and it's changes over time, and translations. It could also possibly include interviews with the author or information about whether the author had any failed publication attempts.

Reception
No, this article does not have a reception section. In the lead section it mentions an award the book receieved, but it would benefit from having information about what this award was for, the nomination process, etc. It would also benefit from having information about how the article was received by readers and published reviews/critques.

Infobox
No, there is not infobox included in this article. It would benefit from having an infobox as a reference point for quick facts/overview of the book.

Others
No, the article does not have any other sections or sub-sections (just "plot introduction" and "plot summary" sections).