User:Emily Misaki YS/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Hotarubi no Mori e

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.)

I chose this article because it looked like an interesting topic, and it matters because it helps to diversify the culture topics presented on Wikipedia. My preliminary impression is that it is a pretty well developed article, but as a GA-class article, it can be improved a bit further.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section:


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes!
 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
 * No, all of the information presented in the lead is rewritten in later sections.
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is very concise and fits in a lot of varied information about the manga

Content:


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the article's content is very relevant to the topic. The article dives a lot into the development of the manga, its plot, and its subsequent release as an anime, as well as awards it received.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is no content that is missing, and content that is included is relevant and definitely belongs.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * While it does address a topic related to a less represented population (although not entirely underrepresented), this topic specifically (manga) is very popular and well represented.

Tone and Balance:


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article presents all of the information in a very neutral and factual way, and does not present it to push a certain narrative on readers.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article does compliment the manga and subsequent anime more than it criticizes, but this can be attributed to the fact that the manga generally received high praise from critics. So, while it does make claims that appear more biased towards the manga being good, this is due to the Wikipedia article staying as true to fact as possible.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The positive and praising viewpoints are often used throughout the article, and are thus seem slightly overrepresented. However, they are used as frequently as they are because the manga received praise by critics.
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * The minority or fringe viewpoints are generally negative comments and criticisms of the manga. These viewpoints are still included in the article (but limited) and the editors of the article took note of the limited nature of the criticisms, such as through writing " Browne's criticisms were limited to noting...".
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * While the article does praise the manga a lot, it does not necessarily attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another but instead presents the reader with the views that are held of audiences and critics that have read and watched the manga/anime.

Sources and References:


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Generally, all facts in the article are backed up by a secondary source of information, with every paragraph and sometimes sentence being cited. However, upon further investigation of the sources, it is not clear how reliable the sources of information are. For manga and anime and other non-Western forms of entertainment, it is generally difficult to find very reliable or scholarly sources on the topic.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, they are completely about the topic and stay focused on solely on the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are not very current, as they all are from 2011-2012, and none are from the last 10 years.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * It is not clear if the sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors or if they include historically marginalized individuals where possible. This Wikipedia article makes the most use out of sources that simply catalogue information about animes and manga rather than present an opinion or argument about the topic.
 * 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.)
 * No, there are no peer-reviewed articles. Hotarubi no Mori e (and manga/anime in general) doesn't receive a lot of reliable coverage.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, they do work. However, they do not link to very reliable sources.

Organization and Writing Quality:


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it is very concise, clear, and easy to read. There are no points where the article strays away from the intended topic.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, it does not 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?
 * It is very well-organized, and is broken into coherent sections that make sense of the topic. The article is broken up into plot, production, media, reception, and these sections are further broken up into sub-sections.

Image and Media:


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article does not use may images, and only includes two images throughout the entire article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, the images are well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, the images are laid out in a visually appealing way, but it would look even better to include a few more photos.

Talk Page Discussion:


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Since this topic is about a big part of Japanese culture, and, because of that, is usually initially written about in Japanese. So, there were a few discussions on how to communicate song titles and other names in English accurately while still following formatting rules. There were also discussions on how to maintain a neutral point of view when talking about this topic.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is part of the WikiProject Anime and manga, and it is rated GA-class.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We didn't talk extensively in class about how to integrate criticisms and praise of topics into the article while maintaining a neutral point of view. So, it was interesting to see how the editors of this article decided to tackle the issue, not using any personal biases but by directly noting the criticisms and praises that other people provided.

Overall Impressions:


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria, is rated GA-Class, and has low-importance status.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article successfully describes the topic in concise detail, going into depth about many aspects of the topic (its production, the anime version of the manga, reception). Not only that, but it integrates outside critique and opinions on the topic well and manages to maintain a neutral point of view.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article should include more photos and make further use of reliable secondary sources that were written within the last ten years.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * This article is incredibly well-developed. It maintains focus on the topic and concisely conveys its information in an incredibly organized manner. It is clear that the article went through many revisions to get to this stage.