User:Byte-the-dust/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: (History of metallurgy in China)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I searched within the History of Science Wikiproject, and found an article on the history of science and technology in China through the cultural subsection. On that page, I found a link to the specific page on metallurgy. As an American student, I have mostly learned through a Eurocentric lens, and I hope to learn more about the history of science outside of Europe while evaluating this article. Since this is my first article evaluation, it felt more reasonable to work with a less broad subject.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead is three sentences describing the article's topic. It assumes the reader already knows what metallurgy is, and is incredibly brief.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The contents divide the article into the different metals, a period of time, and myths. This is not mentioned in the sentences.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise and brief.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes; the topic is about metallurgy in China, so the contents discuss the different metals used in China's history, some methods of working with said metal, and some Chinese legends about metallurgy.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content appears to be up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * All content was relevant, but there was not a lot of discussion around the applications of metal, ie if having better metal meant weapons were used more. Additionally there were no photos of any mentioned artifacts.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Not readily.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There's no real discussion on how the metallurgy effected China; if agriculture was improved, if warfare increased, if these goods were used as exports.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes; there are multiple sources both current and within public domain.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, although again an argument can be made for discussing the effects of metallurgy.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Some are not current but are still relevant.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, all the links seem to work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is concise and clear and easy to read; an argument can be made for it being too brief.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Nothing that would detract from readability.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The sections are sufficient. It is a little strange to have the majority of the sections on the different metals, in addition to one section about the middle ages and one on myths and legends. It may have been more effective to divide the article into different time periods, and to discuss the metals as subsections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There is only one image but it demonstrates one of the metallurgy techniques so it is useful.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The image has a brief but effective caption. Admittedly the same image is used in the wikipedia article on blast furnaces, and its caption there is more descriptive.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * The image is from a 400 year old encyclopedia; it is within the public domain, and so follows the regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * It is dull but not horrible.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are a couple discussions about some quotes from the sources referenced in the article, and someone saying that the use of BCE is better than BC.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is within the Chinese WikiProject, and is a C-class article with high importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * There is no mention of any outside influences, nor any real discussion on why metallurgy truly mattered for China.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is satisfactory.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article is to the point, and doesn't seem to try to argue for any particular position.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Again, discussing the actual applications of metallurgy would be an improvement.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is not entirely well developed, but it is developed enough.

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: