User:Cease2be/sandbox

Which article are you evaluating?
Irish mythology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article for three main reasons. The first was because Irish mythology quite easily falls under the general umbrella of mythology. I felt that it has enough to do with mythology that it easily satisfied any of the requirements for this class. My second reason for choosing this article was quite simply because I thought Irish myth would be an interesting topic to look at. I don't know much about it and I was interested in knowing more. I'll admit that the passing of Saint Patrick's day may have influenced my choosing of this article, but I would wager to guess that I would have had an interest in it regardless. My third reason was simply because I could already see some issues with the article. Wikipedia has a banner at the top remarking on its lack of sufficient sources.

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.)

The opening of the Wikipedia article, Irish Mythology, is quite strong. The article, for lack of a better word, defines Irish Mythology and explains its origins quite well. Irish myth is broken up into cycles and the article mentions this. The different cycles each have their own section after a brief overview in the introduction or opening of the article. It does not appear to contain information that is not elsewhere in the article, and is concise and informative.

The content of the article is primarily focused on the cycles and the myths and stories within each cycle. There are sections on both the heroes of the myths and the creatures of the myths that could be expanded. One could gather from the talk page and the article's references that the reason these two sections were not previously expanded upon is because of a lack of resources. All of the content appears to be relevant and as up-to-date as information about age old myths could be.

The tone appears to be neutral and there is no noticeable imbalance of focus on a particular section.

Sources: There are a good number of sources but their could be more. I realize a lot of the lack of sources likely has to do with barriers such as time, language, and overall accessibility. A lot of myths deteriorate or at the very least change over time (like a game of telephone) and I realize that finding reliable sources about old myths is difficult. This is only made more difficult by the fact that most of the oldest sources are not written in English.

The following is a secondary source that references a number of sea creatures in Irish myth with direct excerpts to the texts in which these myths are taken from as well as a translation immediately following the excerpt. The Book of Leinster which is referenced in the following source is also mentioned and referenced in the Wikipedia article, though to my knowledge the article shows no quotes or translations from the book. The Movement of Water as Symbolized in Early Irish Texts The reference remarks on a great number of Irish sea creatures as well as their significance and what the creatures might symbolize. The latter is not relevant as the Wikipedia article does not mention interpretations of the Irish Myths beyond the fact that Christian monks wrote many of the manuscripts used as reference and thus the stories within the manuscripts may have been altered, or rather the monks may have interpreted and transcribed the myths as they pleased.

Another source: The following source, while short and very opinionated, has a lot of similar information to the Wikipedia article as to the cycles. It is not the most ideal source, but it still contains information.

Townshend, George. “Irish Mythology.” The Sewanee Review, vol. 23, no. 4, 1915, pp. 458–67. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27532846. Accessed 18 Mar. 2024.

This source is significantly less opinionated and references significantly more individual myths in more detail. This source comes across as much more scientific and provides reasoning for translations. The source is rich in information.

Maclean, Hector. “Gaelic Mythology.” The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 9, 1880, pp. 167–81. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2841973. Accessed 18 Mar. 2024.

The organization of the article is easy to follow. Some sections could be added to. The writing is clear enough and professional. The images improve the article and are well-captioned.

The talk page seems pretty barren but there are a good number of sources to be considered. A few edits have been explained. The feedback section has useful information as well.

The article seems to be rated start-class. I think that the article is strong and has a lot of good information but much more could be added to it.