User:Cgdevlin/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: (link) Lion of Saint Mark
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: We learned about the lion of St. Mark as a symbol of Venice in class, and I noticed that the article said it needed improvement.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * It covers the basics, but it is confusingly worded and could be restructured to be clearer.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes. It mentions the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria, the Venice Film Festival and Italian naval flags, none of which are revisited.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise, but it does a poor job summarizing the page or the topic.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * No. The article fails to mention modern depictions of the lion.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes. The article should be expanded on to include more information on the symbolism of the lion in creating the myth of Venice, as well as other depictions of the lion of St. Mark.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * 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?
 * No. Some of the citations are links to web articles with no information as to author, sources, etc.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No. They do not represent all, or even a thorough survey, of what has been written about St. Mark's lion.
 * Are the sources current?
 * No. They are not up to date in terms of when they were published or their subject matter.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Many of the sources do not have an author listed, so it is difficult to tell. However, it does not appear that the author of the wikipedia page tried to find diverse sources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is not particularly well-written. The sentences are sometimes wordy or confusingly structured.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * While the writing style could be improved upon, I did not find any errors in the grammar or spelling itself.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * No. The breakdown is confusing and there are multiple sections that could be added.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

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 only two comments, one of which calls for deletion and the other which argues the article can be improved.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is part of WikiProjects on Christianity/Saints, Italy, and Heraldry and vexillology.
 * It is start-class
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * In class, we talked about the use of the lion of St. Mark as a tool in constructing the myth of Venice. The art and architecture of Venice, notably San Marco's Cathedral, use the lion as a propagandistic tool to legitimize Venice and its claim to St. Mark's body. This article does not mention this use of the lion.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Start status
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * At the bottom of the article are a series of pictures of the lion on flags and shields. This is interesting to look at.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article needs a lot more information, as well as improved sources. As a start, someone could focus on finding scholarly sources as opposed to uncredited web articles.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Because of the lack of information and credible sources, I would call this article poorly developed.

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: Talk:Lion of Saint Mark