User:Goatmanatee/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: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose the article Incan agriculture because it was in the Peru WikiProject as a mid-importance article with a C rating, and seemed relevant to what I have learned in my course on Colonial Latin America.

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
While the introductory sentence describes the whole article, I felt it had some irrelevant information and could be more concise.

I felt that the lead could have had more information related to the section on food security, such as how qullas could guard against famine or how crop diversity could counter crop failure.

The lead includes some information not present in the article.

The lead is fairly concise, I just felt that some of the details could be synthesized better.

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 content of the article is relevant to the topic.

Sources were up to date, with the most recent from 2017.

The only major content I thought was lacking is a discussion of the division of labor by gender in the section on organization, although it is mentioned in the section on farming tools. The discussion of agriculture in the Amazon Basin could also be elaborated on. I also felt that a discussion of the impact of pre-Incan Andean cultures could be relevant, although that could also be a discussion for a separate article. However, I felt all of the content present in the article belonged.

The article discusses an Amerindian culture, which may be underrepresented.

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 felt neutral.

Claims do not seem biased, and seemed to be empirically based.

I did not think any viewpoints were over or underrepresented in the article, although I do wonder why there are no listed articles on the agriculture of non-Incan Andean cultures in the "See Also" section.

The article does not attempt to persuade the reader of a certain position.

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 article used reliable secondary sources, although the lead section may be able to use more citations.

The sources seem to reflect available literature.

The sources are current, with the most recent from 2017.

The sources include non-English speaking and female authors.

The links work.

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
The article is concise, clear, and easy to read, although some of the information could have been synthesized better.

The article has good grammar and spelling.

The article is broken down well to reflect major points, but could use some minor reorganization.

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
The images enhance the understanding of the topic.

The images are well captioned.

The images adhere to copyright regulations.

The images are laid out in a visually appealing way.

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
Conversations mostly address important information which was added to the article.

The article was rated as a C-Class, and is part of the WikiProjects on Indigenous Peoples of the Americas, Peru, and Agriculture.

In class, more emphasis was placed on the organization of labor.

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
The article's overall status is complete and up-to-date.

The article's strengths are the thorough overview of Incan agriculture and the description of the technologies used for Incan farming.

The article can be improved by adding a little more information on the organization of labor and on agriculture in the Amazon Basin, and by reorganizing and synthesizing the information slightly more.

The article is well-developed.

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: