User:Di1001/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The Lightning Thief

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Lead section
A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.


 * Introductory sentence clearly explains what the topic is for the reader - easy to identify that this is the first book in the Percy Jackson Series
 * The lead has a contents section, but does not describe the major sections at all. Instead it focuses on the various adaptations of the novel, which is only one section of the article
 * The lead does not include information that is not present in the article
 * The lead is concise but includes some information that does not seem essential to have in the lead

Content
A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.


 * The content is relevant to the topic, but there are additional sections such as analysis, or maybe relation to greek mythology that the article could benefit from
 * The content is up to date. Has updates as recent as January 2022 about new developments regarding the novels adaption to a Disney+ TV show
 * The article addresses learning disabilities as this is a major plot point of the book, but does not discuss it outside of discussion of the plot

Tone and Balance
Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.


 * The article is overall neutral in the sense that it does not include any biased language, but does seem to have a favorable view of the novel
 * Particularly in the critical reception section, positive reviews and acclaim for the novel is heavily over represented, the section does not include any negative reception of the novel at all
 * the section even begins with the sentence "The Lightning Thief received mostly positive reviews" which may be true, but seems like it is pushing a biased opinion
 * only minority viewpoint presented is " the inclusion of a review from Common Sense Media which "[described] the prose as "choppy and attitude-filled" and complaining that "[t]he characters aren't emotionally involving." author follows this sentence though by stating "numerous other reviews were more positive" and subsequently only including positive reviews.
 * The article attempts to persuade the viewer that this is not only a good book, but a massive success and somewhat groundbreaking

Sources and References
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * 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?
 * This article heavily focuses on the various adaptations of the novel, and in my opinion takes up an unnecessary portion of the

Images and Media

 * The main image of the article is of an obscure cover of the book that most audiences would not be familiar with, which can be misleading. This is also the only image included.
 * This image is accurately, but briefly captioned "First Edition Cover"
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Talk page discussion
The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * 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

 * 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?