User:Elizrm/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Marion Mahony Griffin

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose Marion Mahony Griffin because she was one of the only female architects during a time when her field was male-dominated. Her story matters in design history because of the impact her architecture and ideas made, both nationally and internationally. My preliminary impression was that while the article was informative and generally kept a neutral tone, it lacked citations and cross-referencing.

Evaluate the article
Lead section


 * Yes, the lead includes an introductory sentence that tells the reader who Marion is.
 * No, it does not include brief overviews of all the sections, such as her partner Walter Burley Griffin who she worked with for many years.
 * It mentions her work in India and Australia as following the Prairie School ideals of "indigenous landscape and materials in newly formed democracies." The section talking about this work, titled "Work with Walter Burley Griffin," does not mention these ideals.
 * The lead is concise.

Content


 * Yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * Yes, the content is up-to-date.
 * For the most part, there does not seem to be content missing or content that does not belong. The article could benefit from some elaboration, such as how Marion was taken on to Walter's projects and in what capacity.
 * Yes, the article references how Marion was one of the only female architects on the scene at that time. It also addresses how the majority of her work was attributed to male architects she worked with, such as Frank Lloyd Wright.

Tone and Balance


 * The article is neutral.
 * There are no claims that seem heavily biased.
 * There are no viewpoints that are over or under represented.
 * Minority viewpoints are accurately described as such, although there are not many of them.
 * The article does not attempt to persuade.

Sources and References


 * There is some content that is missing citations, and some of the references have dead links. Some sources have no author.
 * I believe the sources could be more thorough. After viewing a few, I noticed that a couple had extensive citations. The source's own citations could be used for more thorough research.
 * Many of the sources are current.
 * The sources don't noticeably include historically marginalized individuals.
 * I believe there are better sources available. I found many relevant peer-reviewed journals after brief research.
 * Not all links work.

Organization and writing quality


 * The article is well-written an easy to read, however it switches the name they refer to Marion by, which becomes confusing.
 * There are no noticeable grammatical errors.
 * It's well-organized and easy to follow.

Images and Media


 * The article includes images that enhance understanding.
 * The images are well-captioned.
 * Yes, they adhere to copyright regulations.
 * The images are slightly small, especially considering their horizontal dimensions, and could be laid out better.

Talk page discussion


 * There are only a few discussions happening with little input. They point out information that is not properly elaborated on and source links that needed editing.
 * The article is rated C-class and is a part of 6 WikiProjects.
 * Wikipedia discusses this topic similarly to how we talked about in class, but the comments are less formal than I anticipated and there are no continuous discussions of edits being made.

Overal impressions


 * The article has good bones and relevant content, however, it's lacking some information and citations.
 * The article sticks to the facts and does not have any heavy biases.
 * The article could benefit from further academic research.
 * I would assess the article as being slightly underdeveloped. The main points are there, however, it leaves something to be desired.