User:Dhernandez98/Evaluate an Article

Article Evaluation

 * Philosophy of happiness
 * It is vague in certain sections and I am fairly well versed in the topics. It also seems to need a lot of work

Lead evaluation
The article mentions the concept of luck but it does not seem to be a theme mentioned throughout the description of the Philosophy of Happiness. The first sentence seems well written to me, but the following needs some adjustments tailored to the rest of the information presented in the article.

Content evaluation
The article's content is relevant to the topic for the most part. Some sections are questionable such as just simply stating in one section that Wladyslaw Tatarkiewicz saw happiness as a fundamental ethical category. His mentioning seems largely irrelevant given that almost all philosophers would see this claim. The philosophers mentioned ends at 2007 so there may also be some new philosophers that might be worth adding to the article.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral and simply presents the facts it discusses. There is a lack of opinion in all the sections. However, the concept of "hedonism" is only mentioned once in the entire article, and is clearly an important theory in the philosophy of happiness. I believe that it should receive a more thorough mentioning.

Sources and references evaluation
Some sections have no cited sources at all. The "scientism" section has no citations at all, as well as the "cultures not seeking to maximize happiness" section. Added and edited citations are definitely needed.

Organization evaluation
The article has grammatical and spelling errors. The word maximize is written as maximise, and I'm fairly certain that this is not an alternative spelling, but I would need to research that more. Some sentences need restructuring.

Images and media evaluation
There are some images presented of philosophers, but surely more can be added to make certain points more apparent. One picture has the heads of a couple of philosophers, but one of the heads wasn't mentioned in the section where the picture is located. More work on the media and images is needed.

Talk page evaluation
One question addresses how a paragraph is well written but lacks certain information, so the person who commented asked if someone who's well versed could add to that section. One person who commented insists that a section related to hedonism is incorrect and needs revision. Another person removed a section. And someone else just commented what they changed. There are only 4 comments on the talk page to date.

Overall impressions
Overall evaluation

There are several strengths with the article. For the most part, it is well written, concise, and clear. But there are some factual changes that need to be made. One person's comment on the talk page wasn't addressed. The lead needs to be more tailored to the sections that follow. Certain sections are vague and need to be added on. Some literally only have one or two sentences. It's currently organized by mostly philosopher and date. But this does not seem to me to be the most effective way to organize this information. Although it would be a big project, I feel the article should be organized more by branch or theory of the Philosophy of Happiness. The article is certainly incomplete and underdeveloped.

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: