User:Bri.mendonsa/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: Anthropology of art
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Art history and arts education is something I am very interested in, as well as physical and cultural anthropology. I feel this article topic may embody my interests inside and outside our of course, and I will be able to learn and apply my knowledge moving forward.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


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

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes, it was last edited on 25 April 2019, but I feel that there is still missing information that could be updated- only one source is from the 2000's so the source material could definitely be added to in order to make it more current.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes, I feel there is definitely content missing as well as more sources.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? I would say overall yes, it is fairly neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No I wouldn't say that, I just feel that there could be more viewpoints added if new source material is added. Only 3 of the 13 sources lists are from female authors so that alone makes me want to hunt for a new variety of sources who can help shape the article to be more complete and inclusive.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Underrepresented, see above.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? In certain ways I feel that yes it does, It's largest section of text is all about 'problems' and the history section is very brief. Not many examples are given, and there zero images relating to the article. There is so much more to expand on once you find the right sources.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? I believe there are additional sources that are more current that could update the article a bit. All older books, no variety in source material.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes. Books not linked directly online so I would have to get a physical copy of the books to see if the information is really coming from there.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, however those who read at a lower level than myself may get confused by the wording/vocabulary choices, it may be too complex for some.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I saw.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It's a great start, but not enough and not complete in my opinion.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Not one, that's a problem.
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? "This article could be greatly improved by adding some precedent and history for the anthropology of art, rather than identifying its inception solely with one anthropologist. Expanding on the anthropology of art in a cross-cultural context could also be helpful. There is also a large gap in references from the 1930s to the 1980s, where an explanation or elaboration could be used. Scbrobst (talk) 21:55, 1 February 2017 (UTC)"
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. Yes, This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I feel that in class we examine many different points of view from all types of available sources including written text, objects, images, etc. This article only uses written works for source material. We are much more inclusive in class while this is very one note.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It's a great starting point, but only just that.
 * What are the article's strengths? Lots of older written sources to begin with and links for those unfamiliar with anthropology and art in general.
 * How can the article be improved? A variety of updated source material, including images and other reputable sources. I want to hear different points of view as well. Add content.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped.

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: