User:Chase Jablon/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)This One Summer
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I found the area on censorship interesting and thought it would benefit from the adding of its rank in the ala's top ten most challenged books.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it describes the book that will be discussed as a graphic novel with illustrator and writer along with the publishing year and a brief description of the book.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? It doesn't mention the criticism against the book in the lead, but does give a brief description and background.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, the majority of the plot is hinted at in the lead. Criticism and censorship which aren't present in the lead are present in the article however.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It's very concise as compared to other articles I have read, being only two and a half lines long.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, all content is relevant, the author(s) of the article don't stray beyond subject matter.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes, the article was edited last July 31st of 2016.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? They don't have a long description of the plot, and don't mention ala rankings, but it doesn't appear that there is anything particularly missing, perhaps more information about the author would be helpful and the mention about the ala listing.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The article is neutral in language, but only includes positive reception and has a positive take against the censorship of the book, all of the quoted material and stances are sourced however.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The reviews of the book are definitely claims that are bias, but this isn't reflective of the author(s) of the wikipedia page.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Criticism is under-represented, and absent, and praise is over-represented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The article definitely leads towards a persuasion to read the book without using directly persuasive language, this is possible through selective quotation.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The New York Times quote is not sourced, much of the censorship section is also not sourced.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? All sources are relevant, and appear broad given the limited information on this book found online.
 * Are the sources current? The sources span from 2014 to 2016, this isn't very current, they should include more recent sourcing on the page.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, three of the links I tried have worked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is very concise, the article is quite short.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not any that I'm able to find.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, there are three sections: plot, criticism, and censorship which are all relevant to the topic.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? It provides the reader with an image of the book cover, which would allow a reader to recognize the book.
 * Are images well-captioned? The actual image isn't captioned, only details about the book (ISBN, publisher, city, etc...)
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, the picture cites fair use.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? The picture is cut off, this needs to be addressed.

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 no conversations in the talk section.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes, Women-writers star class, low importance, Books, star class, Comics, star class-high importance, and Children's Literature, star class.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The wikipedia article doesn't touch on the intentions of the author as we do in class, the wikipedia article is a lot more surface-level and matter-of-fact in this respect.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It's an underdeveloped piece, likely due to low interest in the subject matter. The piece has biased quotes and therefore needs more criticism-quotes to balance the bias that the article writer has created.
 * What are the article's strengths? There are a decent amount of sources for the size of the article, and the grammar is very good.
 * How can the article be improved? By adding the ala list of books information in the censorship section, adding author background info as there's no page for the author, more critical reviews, and more synopsis from someone who has read the book.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is small but the information about the book is also small. Additional material would consist of more information about the plot, author, and criticism on the book.

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: