User:Cscannell1/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: The 39 Steps (1959 film)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article to evaluate because of my interest in film, in addition to the fact that I recently studied Hitchcock's version of this film in one of my film courses.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead begins with an introductory sentence naming the date of release, genre, director and two stars of the film. The Lead includes a preview to the plot summary, as well as touching upon some of the information that will be covered in the main sections, such as the nature of the adaptation, since this is a book to film adaptation, as well as some information about the production itself. The Lead does not seem to include any information that is not present in the rest of the article, and seems to include just enough to introduce the reader to the topic.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article's content is definitely relevant to the topic itself, and covers almost any basic aspect of the film that the general reader would be interested in learning, such as the plot, cast, production details, information about how the work has been adapted, its reception, and information about its release. Since the film is quite old, and there don't seem to be any recent developments to uncovered information about it, all of the content appears to be up to date. All of the content presented is relevant to the topic.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is neutral. Not only do the authors leave their own opinions about the film out of the article, but they also make sure to present several sides when they do present opinions (such as those made by critics). There don't seem to be any claims that are heavily biased toward a particular position. While viewpoints are represented, they don't attempt to convince the reader of anything.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The facts in the article are backed up by reliable secondary sources and do reflect many of the important literature that would cover this topic. It seems as if the most recent sources are from 2012, many of the others being from the early 2000s or even the or 1960s. However, since the film came out in 1959, these sources are contemporary to the work and would have been important. The links that are available seem to work.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well-written and easy to read. The only grammatical errors I've been able to catch may have just been as a result of myself reading the sentence differently than it was intended to read. The article follows the general structure of Wikipedia articles on film, and is well-organized.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

There could be more images in the article. There is only one, and it features a poster for the film. That image is captioned appropriately.The image seems to adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations and is laid out in a visually appealing way.


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

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The article has a C Rating and is a part of WikiProject Film. It was also recently checked and edited.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

I think overall the article is quite good. It does cover most of the topics related to the film, however, it could probably be a little more detailed, and could definitely use more pictures. Overall I would say that it is well developed.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or 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: