User:Carlsontemple/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Talk:Earthsea (universe) - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
We had previously discussed it in class and was curious about how its Wikipedia summaries faired.

Evaluate the article
Earthsea (universe)

Earthsea (universe) - Wikipedia

Lead Section:

The lead section is thorough when combined with the table of contents, but the layout of the table of contents could be improved.
 * The lead section is expansive and covers the gist of the article. It includes the list of novels in the universe as well as the distinction that the article is about the entire universe and not a summary of each novel.
 * It does not include a list of the major sections which may be useful but does have a major table of contents that may be able to be shortened.
 * There is no information that is not discussed within the article.
 * It is a little extensive covering all of the books that encapsulate the universe, and the table of contents section is extremely long.

Content:

The content is relevant however there are unnecessary discussions within the article.
 * All of the content is relevant to the article.
 * The content is generally up to date and there are some sources that were retrieved in 2018 and 2015 so there has been some work on the article recently.
 * There is some content that is not relevant; there is discussion about which short stories should be considered canon in the article itself, there are some instances of direct quotation without citations; superfluous sentences describing specific encounters within novels that are not relevant to the universe
 * No, the article is about a fictional universe.

Tone and Balance:


 * The article is not neutral. There is an alarming amount of inappropriate language and content that introduce bias and heuristics into the article.

"When dragons do speak, they are worth listening to, as they have long lifespans over which to gain great wisdom."

"Dragons consider most men to be uninteresting, short-lived mayflies."

"The wars and romantic heroes of this period form part of mythology, similar to the Trojan War in European culture."


 * The article is very subjective in terms of interpretation of morality of certain characters, and often makes claims that are supported with citations.

"There is often a Taoist message: "good" wizardry tries to be in harmony with the universe, while "bad" wizardry, such as necromancy, can lead to an upsetting of the "balance" and threaten catastrophe."

There are numerous examples of direct quotation which is inappropriate as well as inappropriate language that introduces bias into the article.
 * No viewpoints seem to be especially important in terms of the universe, but there is a significant amount on dragons and very few on each of the other animals which imbalances the article. Also, how the authors set up the table of contents is extremely long and makes the article difficult to read.
 * The article does not appear malicious in how they persuade the reader with certain biases, but the use of direct quotations at certain points make the article seem argumentative rather than neutral.

Sources and References:


 * Not all of the information is supported by sources, especially in the geography, magic, religion, and history sections.
 * Although I haven't read every novel, it seems that there is available literature to support the statements, but the novels and sources are not cited with the claims.
 * There are some sources which are from 2018 and 2015 which indicates it has seen some attention recently in comparison to the universe's inception, but the lack of references is concerning.
 * There are numerous sources found from videos and interviews with the author, Le Guin, and a considerable amount of the articles are written by women authors.
 * The universe is expansive and there could be a considerable number of sources that mention aspects of this universe that could be insightful.

Magic, Witchcraft, and Faërie: Evolution of Magical Ideas in Ursula K. Le Guin's Earthsea Cycle

Redemption of the Divine: The Feminine Spirit in Le Guin’s Earthsea Cycle Af Thomas Gitz-Johansen, Cand. Mag., Ph.D.

There are some available sources, but a lot of claims in the article are not substantiated with citation.
 * The links work for the most part, although some are archived which will not allow a user to reach them.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The structure of the article should be improved by changing the table of contents and decreasing the importance of certain sections such as the creature section. Additionally, the article is not grammatically incorrect, but the style and argumentative nature of the writing is inappropriate for a Wikipedia article.
 * The article is not well-written. There are numerous instances of direct quotation as well as biased language that is not supported with citation.
 * There are no glaring spelling or grammar errors.
 * The article touches on important sections of the universe but inflates certain aspects like the section describing dragons.

Images and Media:

Especially being fiction it may be useful to include cover arts or images of aspects of the universe to help the reader understand the article.
 * There are absolutely no images to support the article.

Talk Page Discussion:


 * There is an interesting discussion on if this article should be merged with the actual Earthsea novel. However there was a counter that Wikipedia maintains differences between series novels and their respective literature in the cases of Narnia and the Harry Potter Universe and in actuality parts of the article for the specific novels should be deleted or merged into the universe novel.
 * The article is rated C-Class Low Importance, and is part of Wikiproject Novels and Wikiproject Female Writers.
 * It is interesting to see the argument in the talk page not about the relevance of the information, but the fact that certain information on Wikipedia should be included in some articles and not in others. Summaries of Earthsea novels may be technically relevant in the universe article, however it would make this article too long and it would more appropriate for them to have their own pages. The idea of merging and splitting articles is a unique aspect of Wikipedia.

Overall Impressions:


 * The articles overall status is C-Class Low Importance.
 * The article's strengths is that it offers a lot of content that is relevant to the understanding of it's subject.
 * The article could be improved by cleaning up some of the biased language, some examples are within this evaluation, and to include appropriate citations when certain aspects of the universe are discussed.
 * The article seems completed in terms of being an article about a fictional universe, however there are certain content and organizational changes that could improve the article.