User:CDDRDR/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Diplomacy - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Diplomacy is the bedrock of Political Science and International Relations. It involves the maneuvering of civilizations, resources, and human interactions on the world stage, formally and informally throughout history. Preliminary impression was of disappointment in finding the lack of verified sources, as well as the general ambiguity of the article [overall understandable given the expansive array of elements involved in Diplomacy over the ages].

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The overview of this article is concise, relevant to the topic; limited to information related to the topic; highlights major sections effectively; and is neither unclear nor overly detailed.

Content: Materials and constructs defined/explained in the article are provided with equitable levels of focus between subjects; content is relevant and-where historical-organized chronologically with fluid structure; Content is broad and could use further expansion---concepts and aspects explained are up-to-date, objectively without becoming too vested in one form of diplomatic application over another. Content provided is insufficient and should be filled in with significantly more information over the eras since diplomatic inception; article focuses on vague, albeit accurate aspects of diplomacy and international relations, examples provided are succinct and limited; content does not account for wiki equity gaps as it is generic, objective, broad and neutral, equity gaps do not apply.

Tone & Balance: Point of view is neutral; no notable events of controversy or contention; does not attempt to persuade, adjudicate, issue biases or over/underrepresent viewpoints.

Sources & References: Red Flag. Notable lack of sufficient sources nor extensive source diversity; in certain instances no sources are cited at all; few sources present focus on ancillary hyperlinks to parallel subject matter and not verification of presently stated materials; Better sources are certainly available-again in some instances any sources are available; those hyperlinks provided do successfully work when clicked.

Images & Media: Images successfully, relevantly enhance topic-in some instances they [vaguely] aid in understanding [the topic]; Images do reflect the literature of the topic; Images are largely historical so currency is less immediate as a concern; Images vary in quality of captioning throughout the article; Images, excepting a couple -which are not directly sourced or referenced-, adhere to Wikipedia's copyright policies; Images are structured with appealing aesthetic.

Talk Page Discussions: Talk page largely comprised of corrections, removal of outdated information, accounting for multiple copyright violation corrections as well; overall tone represents disappointment/disinterest/frustration with the article and its limitation(s); article is 'of interest' to three Wiki-Projects [International Relations/Law; Politics: and the Editorial Team (who reviewed it for purposes of updates and maintenance)]. Wiki-Discussion differs from class discourse largely in its interactions within its community; the logistics and processes of its legislation and the protocols which govern that interaction.

Overall Impressions: Articles overall status is INCOMPLETE. Strengths would be limited to successfully referencing [albeit vaguely] core diplomatic concepts, and well structured chronology, finally a viable lead section; Article could stand for improvements in quality of content, source material, diverse source material, overall source material increase, more viability and interest in Wiki-Talks and additional contributors; Article is under-to-poorly-developed.