User:Ghorsefield/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: Klingon language
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate:
 * I have chosen this particular article because I am first and foremost, a Linguistics student. In addition to this fact, I am also an avid consumer of Science Fiction, especially that which strongly involves space and space exploration. In my opinion, the ultimate fusing of these two interests is the linguistic component present within the Star Trek universe, simply because it is more expansive than other space-themed science fiction canons.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead of this article concisely but clearly describes that the article will contain information regarding the constructed language of the Star Trek canon, Klingon and its linguistic and artistic features.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Generally, yes the lead includes a brief description of the major sections within the article. Not all are included, but a general framework is provided.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, a 'fun-fact' is provided about unique non-Star Trek uses of Klingon, namely, the play A Klingon Christmas Carol.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and does not present a discouraging amount of detail.

Lead evaluation
See above.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article's content stays on-topic, ensuring that only Klingon and linguistics of Klingon related topics are presented.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * While not much new Klingon content is being released, the page is relatively up-to-date with the last revision made 25 August 2020.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is no irrelevant content, nor is there content that is missing based off what has been released keeping in consideration that I am not an expert in Klingon and its linguistics features.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No, this article does not deal with equity gaps or historically underrepresented populations or topics because the content relates to a fictional construct.

Content evaluation
See above.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * For the most part, the article focuses on the linguistic representations of Klingon, which is to be expected of an article covering a language.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article makes no claims or observations that cannot be objectively substantiated in coordination with the provided sources. There are no statements of opinion presented.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No. Because this article is about a fictional language, it is expected that the majority of the focus will be on linguistic structure and patterns, while non-linguistic topics will be of a lower priority.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No. The article is written with the purpose of presenting the facts surrounding the Klingon language. There is no goal of persuasion for this article.

Tone and balance evaluation
See above.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes. The article is backed up by either Linguistic publications covering the same topic or by published material directly from the language-creator.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes. Because Klingon is a constructed language, it faces a lower precedence of effort by linguists who are mostly concerned with exploring natural, non-fictional languages so the number of sources is reduced, but the quality of analysis provided by them is no less of strong stock.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes. There are no cited sources referenced before 1984.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * For the most part, the sources are written by linguists and fans of the series. Generally these are not historically marginalized individuals.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Both wikipedia-internal and external links are functional.

Sources and references evaluation
See above.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the flow of the article is orderly and segments sub-topics in such a way as to eliminate bleeding and confusion.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No grammatical or spelling errors were encountered.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article follows a logical and pleasing flow.

Organization evaluation
See above.

Images and Media

 * Guiding Questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, though they are only images that represent the orthography of Klingon.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * All images are presented from open source and free use content creators.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images are included in their relevant sections where their reference is critical.

Images and media evaluation
See above.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The majority of discussions on the Talk page are linguistically focused and discuss how best to represent linguistic data to accurately represent Klingon as it is canonically known.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a B-rated article and a part of the Constructed Languages WikiProject as well as a B-rated article within the Star Trek WikiProject. The article is of Top-importance for the former, and High-importance for the latter. The article is also listed as a level-5 vitality article in society.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This particular topic has not been discussed in class, but generally it does not cover controversial topics where bias would be a prevalent issue.

Talk page evaluation
See above.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The overall status of this article is very good and of significant importance to its commanding WikiProjects.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The main strength of the article is its effort to remain focused on the linguistic analysis and maintenance of a scientific voice.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * As with all scientific articles, more data and subsequent analysis would always be beneficial and be an improvement.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Again, as long as there is more data to sift through, scientifically, the article will never be complete. That being said, for the data that we do have and the analyses that have come from it, this article is quite comprehensive.

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: