User:Cc3339/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Dura-Europos

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article was chosen mainly for class, also Dura Europos is an important religious site and contemporary archeological and geopolitical field that calls for further documentation.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead:

-Good intro sentence.

-First paragraph feels very crammed with information and hard to digest initially.

-The following paragraphs are easier to understand, less name dropping.

Content:

-Foundation: All info cited, one clarification needed, relevant anecdotes.

-Rebuilding: Weird use of 'perfected' during Parthian period, not many citations in first paragraph. Not enough citation in following paragraphs as well.

-Siege: Also few citations, perhaps due to lack of research? -After: Interesting references to academic disagreement. -Inhabitants: Lacking citations in 2nd para, ambiguous final sentence 'texts must date'.

-Cults: Also lacking citations, thorough survey, though. Relatively lots of focus on religious sites.

-Archeology: Maybe could use more info

-Modern: Personally, I'm curious about the ISIS looting and wish there was more info on that. This category seems to be lacking.

-Maybe the shields under 'Archeological Finds' could use its own page, perhaps use of materials.

This article seems more or less unbiased.

I feel that the images could be more comprehensive.

Otherwise this seems solid.