User:Danlee28/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) Biblical criticism
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * it seems like an interesting article, especially after taking a year of biblical heritage.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes, the lead starts off with a definition of the topic the article is about. "Biblical criticism is the analysis of the Bible from two distinctive perspectives: the 'scientific' concern to avoid dogma and bias by applying a neutral, non-sectarian, reason-based judgment to the study of the Bible, and the belief that reconstructing its history according to contemporary understanding will correctly illuminate the texts." this is a very eloquent, and what I believe to be accurate definition of biblical criticism.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? yes, but does not particularly parallel the the table of contents.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no, the lead is a very brief summary that the article goes more in depth with.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? it is concise, but also provides enough information to get a grasp of the topic.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes, the article's content is relevant.
 * Is the content up-to-date? since biblical study is has a very long history of study, the article's sources are pretty up to date, with many sources originating in the 2000s.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? all of the content is related to biblical criticism.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? yes, it includes a segment of the feminist view of biblical criticism.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes the article is neutral, even during the sections that pertain to a certain demographic.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? there is ample yet consistent coverage of all the viewpoints in the article
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no, it offers a variety of viewpoints and does not seem to influence the reader's perspective on the topic.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? yes, many of the sources are from published books and
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes and they include a variety of different sources
 * Are the sources current? the sources are relatively current, as new information on this topic isnt as spontaneous as lets say biomedical.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? many of the authors are professors, and or scholars
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes most of the links work

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? it is well written, and though it is a bit eloquent, the information is concise and easily conceivable.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? no, not that I see
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? the article is broken down in a easy to conceive manner.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes, the article contains images of prominent figures in the article
 * Are images well-captioned? yes, captions describe the picture well.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes, and theres not too many so that the page is cluttered

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? the conversations pertain to citations and references.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?it is part of three wikiprojects, Wikiproject Religious texts, wiki projectbible/criticism,  and wikiproject christianity. it is rated as "good article"
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? didnt talk about religion in calss

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? "good article"
 * What are the article's strengths? the articles strength is the organization
 * How can the article be improved? more details
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * it is pretty well 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: