User:BrianE22/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: Carl Blechen
 * I have chosen this article because, it seems to be unfinished and Carl Blechen has beautiful works of art. His landscape art is amazing, and if I was a painter I would probably paint in a similar style, landscapes are the beauties of nature.

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 does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article. But it does not include a brief description of the article's major sections. The lead does not include any information that is not present in the article, but it does not go into detail on the mentioned information. It is concise but the lead could use a few additions.

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 very relevant to the topic. The content is up to date, it seems like it could use working on though. There is a lot of content missing, not much is in the article.

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 tone of the article is neutral, no biased information put forward. There seems to be a lot of viewpoints underrepresented, there's no talk of how people view Carl Blecehn or his works of art.

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
The facts are backed up by the secondary sources. It does not reflect the available literature; the article only utilizes a few sources. The sources are current, and do not seem to be biased towards one side, and all the links within the article are working.

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 for as little as there is, is well written and very concise, it gets to the point fast; but also, does not dive into the topics with more detail. There is no errors and the article is not broken down well, the sections could be split up for and more detail given on each section.

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 does include images that enhance your understanding of Carl Blechens work. All the images provided are well captioned, including a name and the date the painting was finished. The images all adhere to copyright regulations, and the images could be laid out in a more appealing way.

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
There are no conversations going on for this article, the article is rated Stub-Class and is a part of the Wikiproject Biography. This article doesn't have much discussion, but the way talk pages discuss a topic is similar to a classroom. Questions are asked and people present their unbiased information on the topic and question and hand. The talk pages have more time to evaluate a question.

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 status of the article is unfinished, the articles strengths are its utilizing beautiful works of art, but not really going into detail on his works of art, his most famous works, and his overall life/style. The article can be improved in a lot of areas mainly by going into greater detail on his works of art, how he got started painting and detail his rise into becoming a professor at an Arts Academy. The article seems to be underdeveloped, even though there is a lot of information missing I do not see the article as "poorly developed" due to its conciseness and the un-biased information put forth.

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: (There were no questions to evaluate).