User:Frogs55/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Lunar New Year.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Today is the Lunar New Year, so I figured that it would make sense to evaluate the holiday's Wikipedia article! It's something I'm aware of but don't have a ton of background knowledge on. I know that this is an important holiday that many people celebrate, and I want to expand my knowledge and learn more while also evaluating the Wikipedia page for accuracy and accessibility.

Evaluate the article
Lead section


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes; the lead includes a clear and concise definition of the Lunar New Year and the various cultural celebrations around it.
 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes; the article's major sections go into the definition of Lunar New Year and how multiple countries and cultures celebrate their versions of the holiday.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
 * No.
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think it's concise, it covers the basics and presents an overview of what the article presents.

Content

 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Relatively; the most recent references are from 2019. Still modern, but not necessarily as up to speed as it could be.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I'm not sure if this counts as content that is missing, but while there is an overview in each major section of the origins of a country/culture's Lunar New Year, there isn't much information on HOW the LNY is celebrated. Granted, if I click on the Chinese New Year article that's linked in the LNY article, that takes me to a detailed page on the Chinese New Year.
 * I don't think there's any content that doesn't belong, everything is related to the LNY and its origins across cultures.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Well, to me, a white American living in a mostly white area, I'm learning about a holiday celebrated by a locally underrepresented group. But on a global scale, I wouldn't say the Lunar New Year celebrations are something that people don't know about. However, that doesn't mean that Asian Americans aren't a minority in America, and treated as such; the LNY article does have a couple of lines about how the phrase "Chinese New Year" being used in the US can be an incomplete/implicitly offensive term, because not everyone who celebrates this holiday is Chinese.

Tone and Balance


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article does not contain any inflammatory language and presents everything in as objective a tone as possible.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I don't think so.
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * In this article, there are no minority or fringe viewpoints discussed.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Sources and References


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Almost all of them; the one that isn't is the following: "The main difference between the Chinese and Vietnamese calendars is that the Vietnamese zodiac replaces the Ox and Rabbit in the Chinese zodiac with the Buffalo and Cat, respectively.[citation needed]"
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, generally speaking.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Some are and some aren't; a lot of links go to other Wikipedia articles, and others go to articles or websites from 2008 or earlier. There are also sources from 2019 or later, though nothing as current as 2023, except for an image within the Wikipedia article.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Generally speaking, the sources are from Asian authors and scholars, with some white European and American authors in the mix.
 * 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.)
 * Browsing through Google Scholar gave me a couple of more recent peer-reviewed articles about Lunar New Year that may be applicable, if not more applicable than the couple of random website links.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Organization and writing quality


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, not that I can see.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * I'd say so; it's pretty clearly organized by region/culture, which makes sense for the topic.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, though I suppose that they could be laid out in a more appealing way? I'm not sure if I've seen a visually stunning Wikipedia article, though.

Talk page discussion


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * EXCITING. The talk page discussion reveals a contention that a user had with the article's inclusion of Jewish and Southeast Asian celebrations of the Lunar New Year; the user argued that the Lunar New Year is mostly associated with East Asians, and to argue otherwise is cultural appropriation. Discussion between Wikipedia users ensued, and it was since revealed that the user taking onus with the page was blocked, as it was actually a sock puppet account.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a level 5 vital article, C-class. It's a part of Time, Astronomy, and East Asia WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Well, there was interesting discourse happening between users and a sock puppet account about Wikipedia's rules relating to no original research and worldwide view.

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Decent, though if you start getting into the weeds it becomes clear that some of the sources need to be updated and there maybe needs to be clarification on how in-depth the article wants to go into Lunar New Year CELEBRATIONS or the more calendar/scientific aspects of the Lunar New Year.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * A balanced spread of cultures are represented, and almost all of the links have sources. The article is clearly laid out and organized.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Sources could be updated, images could be presented in a more appealing way,
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It's a well-developed article that's a solid overview of its subject. Just could use some sprucing up and maybe a couple more eyes on it.