User:Earleyc/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: Duck Dodgers (TV series)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I liked watching Duck Dodgers as a child, so it holds a place in my heart.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
I would argue describing a children's TV show from the the early 2000s as metafictional may be reaching a bit; the show functions in much the same way as other Looney Tunes cartoons in that it uses the same characters in new settings and realities, in ways that are often fourth-wall breaking. Does this constitute metafiction? Given a review of Wikipedia's List of metafictional works is seems like there are other things related to Duck Dodgers that could make a case for this cartoon itself to be metafiction. There is not any discussion of metafiction throughout the rest of the article, at least not explicitly, and either the Lead or Content may need to be edited to address this.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
Content is up-to-date; nothing has changed in the world of Duck Dodgers as far as I know. All content is relevant. Critical reception, if notable, may be missing, though there is a list of awards and nominations. Maybe TV ratings numbers, if available?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The section on Characters may take a few interpretive liberties, like in its description of The Eager Young Space Cadet.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Nearly all the sources are only used in the Accolades section. Other information seems to be sourced from IMDb databases, though there is no actual evidence that that is the case. Episode lists and voice talent should be sourced. The NY Times article didn't redirect properly for me, though the links to the Emmy PDFs did.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
All sections other than the Lead are not all too well-written. The content is somewhat easy to read, but not altogether concise or clear, nor well organized. Many of the sections describing characters and the concept of the show lean heavily on interpretation and not on other critical sources.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There is only one image in the article that enhances understanding, and it is distinctly possible that the image is from the 1953 animated short, not even the TV show itself. That will require further digging to verify. There could certainly be more images of notable points in the series, such as appearances from notable bands like Megadeth. Additions like that would improve a reader's overall impression of the article and enhance the information they received from it.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
The article is a C-class article of low importance. The talk page is all over the place. Most people are praising the show and not offering any actual information or discussing the material of the Wikipedia page itself. Some people are trying to suggest changes. There is also a bot contesting the use of images under Fair Use.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
The article could definitely use fixing. Sentences could be made much more concise and clear; the character descriptions are in desperate need of fixing. The information is there, it just needs sources and sprucing up.

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: