User:CynthiaaaM/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) Ned Stark
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article to evaluate because I really enjoyed watching Game of Thrones, and admired the character Ned Stark. This character also reminds me of loyalty, honesty and masculinity. I would like to see whether this character can be related with Easter, or Japanese Samurai.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * All the information included in the Leas is present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is generally concise, but may need to make changes to the ratios among the aspects covered. More information of the character “Ned Stark” should be given, instead of too much on the TV show or the actor who played this character.

Lead evaluation
In general, the lead gives enough information about the topic, which is sufficient to give audience a clear idea on “Ned Stark”. It introduces the topic in both novel and the TV show, talking about the TV adaptation and the plot twist involving Ned. Talking about the actor also helps to have a better idea.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. The article is all about the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * It seems like no recent changes were made, as the topic was trendy several years ago. In general, I do think the content is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is no content missing or does not belong. It has a clear structure and follows the structure quite well.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * As far as I know, I did not see much about the equity gaps. It does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Content evaluation
It has a clear structure, where headings and subheadings are arranged chronologically and by themes. Images, including a tree diagram, work perfectly to show the contents in a visual way. However, it can be better if the “Storylines” as a heading and the “storylines” as a subheading can be clearly noted to distinguish them.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, I think the article is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I don’t see heavily biased claims in the article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I don’t see overrepresented or underrepresented viewpoints in the article. Things are well balanced!
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * I don’t think so. It just provides the neutral information about the background and the character in the book and in the TV series.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Most of the facts are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. Things are cited through the article. However, as a character in a novel and a TV series, which is trendy for entertainment, many of the resources are from different media or news, such New York Times or HBO, which may provide leading contents.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, the sources are pretty thorough. It includes literature from many angels.
 * Are the sources current?
 * As the topic is trendy several years ago, the sources are current comparing with  that.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes. Sources are from not on HBO, the producer of the show, but also different media and platforms holding diverse angels. Historically marginalized individuals were not included, as it may not be necessary for this topic.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes they work.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources and references are pretty abundant for this article. References are used throughout the article, which is quite sufficient and reliable.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is well-written. It is pretty easy to read, even for the readers who have no idea about the novel, the show, or the character. As the article is not very long, the information is concise and clear.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not see grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It is well-organized in general. It is broken down into different sections, talking about the major points of topic with a logic in it.

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article is clear and effective. It is reader-friendly, with enough information covered in a concise way.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes. Images of the character and contents in the TV show help to enhance the understanding of “Ned Stark” and the story he is in.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes. Captions provide enough concise information.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yeah I think so.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes. The picture of “Sean Bean as Ned Stark” is a smart choice to pick.

Images and media evaluation
Even though there aren’t many images used, each of them serves perfectly to the content, and makes the content more enjoyable and visual.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Discussion about “Jon Snow”, also a character in Game of Throne, “External links modified”, and debates on changing the name of the topic are going on. All of the debates and ideas mentioned in the talk page are reasonable, which show that people are really thinking about the topic in details.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a C-Class article, which is a part of a WikipediaProject Novels/Fantasy, WikiProject Fictional characters and WikiProject A Song of Ice and Fire, mid-importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * o	The reason why I chose Ned Stark is because I wanted to see whether there is “Samurai” spirit in this character. I know Game of Throne is set up in a very different context, and talking basically things that are not related with Asian or Japanese culture. However, after watching the movie the Wolverine and listening to all kinds of movies on Samurai, such as Tom Cruise’s The Last Samurai, I wonder whether Ned Stark also has the spirit of loyalty, strength and other virtues valued as a Samurai. If possible, I would love to do further research on this topic.  o	After going through this, I found that it can be very hard to seek for the relatedness through a Wikipedia page. It is better to directly look for it in literatures or the TV show.  o	As one of the main characters in the first seasons, the topic has earned a certain degree of attention in the Western societies, which lead to more discussion and talks about it on the Wikipedia page. I’m a little worried that there will be less people contributing to characters in some Japanese shows, as probably less people are influenced or have knowledge about it.

Talk page evaluation
Good discussion and debates are going on, which not only helps people to think, but also help to enrich the correctness of the contents.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * In my point of view, it is in a relatively good article, with providing clear and detailed contents in a well-organized structure. As it is a C-class article, it is substantial but still is missing important content. More reliable sources from some academic or professional platforms can help.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It provides clear and general information on the topic. It has a clear structure of contents.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More information and references from reliable sources can be included.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is generally complete, but more details and aspects can be included to strengthen it. It is underdeveloped.

Overall evaluation
Overall, it gives a general idea on the topic, through a clear structure and contents. However, sources from more reliable ends can help to strengthen it. It is reader-friendly, but may lack of some information.

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: