User:Evelynanstanford/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Quentin Tarantino filmography

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am doing a research project that analyzes Quentin Tarantino's film Once Upon A Time... in Hollywood and was curious to know a more general perspective of Tarantino and his work. This is important because understanding the themes, topics, and stories that Tarantino likes to explore will help to inform my research question about the accuracy of Sharon Tate's depiction in Once Upon A Time... in Hollywood. My first impression of this article was that it was a chronological listing of all the film work that Tarantino has been involved in, along with the awards and recognitions he received for his work.

Evaluate the article
I enjoy the detail and organization of this article, but I think it can be reformatted in some ways to draw a reader's attention and provide the correct content to give reader's a brief overview about what the article will be about without diving into the details.


 * The introductory sentence does not clearly describe the topic of this article. Quentin Tarantino has done more than just direct ten films, and it's hard for the reader to know if he's directed ten films or if he's just been involved in directing ten films. I would reword the first sentence to provide a better idea of what Quentin Tarantino.
 * The lead of the article does not give a good overview of the article. It instead goes straight into the details of Tarantino's early career. The reader doesn't get a good understanding of who Tarantino is until toward the end of the article. An individual paragraph separate from film information to give more of an introduction to Tarantino and what he is known for would be helpful.
 * The lead of this article is about half of the article. I would suggest, like before, to make a concise introductory paragraph that mentions a couple of Tarantino's greatest works that will be mentioned later on in the article in detail. The lead is overly detailed currently.

The content of this article is extremely relevant and up-to-date. There has been news about Tarantino's latest works, but it wouldn't be necessary to write about and cite since he hasn't finalized his new works yet. I found the article stuck to the topic of "Quentin Tarantino filmography" very well since it didn't mention Tarantino's other works of literature.

The article appears to be rather neutral.


 * There is one phrase that caught me off guard. The phrase "critically and commercially successful film" is used a few times throughout the article. So although it doesn't lean in any particular direction on its own, its use in the article seems to connect some of Tarantino's films with popular support to earn him awards.


 * Another phrase in the final paragraph, "His greatest commercial success," makes me question what source claimed that this was the "greatest." This seems like it leans too in favor of the subject.
 * Otherwise, the article does a good job of stating the facts and detailing facts that are more important to Tarantino's work.

The article appears to be very well cited.


 * Looking through the works cited, there are quite a few journals or popular magazines that are cited, which aren't always completely reliable since they are usually contained of a critic's interpretations of someone else's work. However, considering the subject, these journals and magazines may just be reporting news about Tarantino. These kind of sources should be double checked for validity.
 * All the sources come from the past decade and have a wide range of perspectives from all kinds of secondary sources. The links work, and a majority of them look scholarly upon glancing through the publishers.

This article is rather easy to read and flows wonderfully with its chronological outline. The tables really help to reemphasize the key points within the article. The language is professional, straightforward, and contains correct grammar.


 * I think, since this is a chronological article, that the paragraphs could reflect transitions or major changes in Tarantino's work. The paragraphs seem to be equally divided with lots of detailed information, but it's a bit difficult to get through each lengthy paragraph. More and smaller paragraphs would help to organize the content better.

The portrait of Tarantino is a very good image to use for this article, but the two other images do not provide any useful information to the reader about Tarantino's work.


 * I would search for images that show Tarantino directing, that show him winning an award or a nomination, or that show examples of the films he's worked on.
 * The images are cited, but they can be moved on the page to fit better with the text and the tables.

This article is included in the WikiProject Film. The main and recent discussion seems to be that this article should be merged with the Quentin Tarantino article rather than remain separate so it can be found easier. This article is on a featured list, so it seems to be a very good example of what an ideal Wikipedia article should look like. A lot of discussions on the Talk page have been resolved, so there's clearly been a lot of work done on it.

The article is really good at presenting accurate, organized, and specific information that would answer anyone's question about what kind of work Tarantino has done in film. Although the visual appeal of this article could be improved upon, any reader can take all the facts of this article and create their own impression of Tarantino and the impact of his work without the article doing so itself.