User:GamerBoi425/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: Statue of George Washington (Seattle)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate:
 * I chose this article because, as a University of Washington student, I walk by this statue all the time and I was surprised about how little was on wikipedia regarding this statue.

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
The lead gives the basics of the statue itself but not much else. The date it was build is not included and no significance of the statue is stated.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The article is stays on topic and is fairly up-to-date (the statue looks the same as it did 5 years ago). However, there is a lot of missing information. Some basic facts are missing, like what is on the plaque below it, or the date it was built or any significant reason it is there.

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 article is neutral, since there's not much to it, I can't tell if there are any biases towards the statue.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The two main sources are reliable, the Smithsonian and the University of Washington itself. The source pages are older, but I think still accurate. The sources give far more through explanations than the main wikipedia page.

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
It is concise with no grammatical errors, however the organization is a bit weird.

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 and it is taken from the ground, off center from the front of the statue. And the caption is vague and only says "The statue in 2015". Unless the editor took the photo, this would violate the copyright regulations because no photographer is cited.

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
All there is on the talk page is a link to an article addressing the question of whether or not the George Washington statue should be removed. The article is stub-class in sculptures, Seattle, public art and visual arts WikiProjects. There is not much here, so I don't think it is representative of class discussions.

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
I think that this article is in dire need of improvement. The article does well at having accurate facts, but outside of that, many facts are omitted that would describe the statue in greater detail. I can improve this article by adding facts around the reasoning behind the introduction of the statue, as well as, some of the controversy surrounding the statue that is important. This will give readers better understanding of the significance of the George Washington statue. I would assess this article as incomplete and underdeveloped.

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: