User:Daniel Thompson326/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Little Red Riding Hood (1997 film)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Required for in class activity by our professor

Evaluate the article
LEAD


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead's first sentence explains what the article's main topic is and a short biography of the film, including director and year published.


 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does not mention that it will explain the plot, reception, or cast, the article just briefly explains the film


 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
 * All information presented in the lead is later mentioned in the article


 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead section is just an overall blurb of what the film is, it does not directly talk about the later sections, but just explains what kind of film it is, who directed it, and the start actor.

CONTENT


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content referred to in the article directly relates to the title and main purpose of the article, the plot, cast, and reception of the film are very important to the articles relevance.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The last time this article was edited was 1 July 2018, the content is relatively up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Typically a reference page is posted for a wiki article or a source page, for this article a notes section is added, this is most likely the reference sources used for the article, all other data seems to be present
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * This article does not deal with any of Wikipedia's equity gaps.

TONE and BALANCE


 * Is the article from a neutral point of view?
 * The article mostly remains neutral throughout its entirety
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No claims appear to push a particular position
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The sentence " She is thus portrayed, in another contrast to traditional depictions of the story, as being less than innocent" can be seen as an interpretation of a part of the film and not direct fact, this claim can make readers view the film differently, making the argument red is less innocent is an interpretive claim.

SOURCES


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * All sources have working links and each are relevant to the topic and provide evidence to support the claim. The only source that did NOT work was the mayastarling because the website no longer exists.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Sources are reliable, information comes from an organization, and mostly for the actors imbd is used as a source, these sources appear neutral.
 * Do the sources come from a diverse array of authors and publications?
 * Yes

ORGANIZATION


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is very easy to read and it is organized, having different sections discussing different topics and each topic being specific to what it is explaining.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Few grammatical and spelling errors "She is clever enough manage without being rescued"
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Each section is well broken down

MEDIA/IMAGES


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No, it is simply just a picture of the box cover of the film
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * If you click on the image, the image is sourced
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, it is under a fair use policy to give context to the reader
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The single image is in an appropriate placement in which the director, actors, year published, and run time are all listed.

TALK PAGE


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There is a discussion about how in the plot section there is an interpretation of Little Red being innocent, this should not be in the article because it is not a neutral view point, there is also a discussion about adding a new section about historical context and the film and its release
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Article does not appear to be rated, it is apart of the WikiProject Film articles section
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * A lot of similarities about being neutral in the plot section came up in both the talk page and in the class discussion, the plot section's point of view is the most debated topic

OVERALL EVALUATION

[Daniel_Thompson326/sandbox]
 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article overall is a decent article, but things such as the plots point of view and grammatical errors need to be fixed to increase the strength of it.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * organization and structure
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The plot's point of view need to be fixed to become more neutral and stray away from the interpretation of little red innocence and the grammar in the article needs to be complete.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I think the article needs to be more flushed out, possible a section about cinematography could be added to discuss the film, a section about possible interpretations about little red and her innocence. Notes should be changed to references.  The plot section should focus more on being a summary rather than an interpretation of the plot.