User:Gryphonheart13/sandbox

Wikipedia Evaluate Article Assignment Template

Wikipedia Rating Scale Explained: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_assessment

In this assignment, we will use only the following ratings: A, B, C, Start, and Stub.

List of controversial issues (to avoid): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_controversial_issues.

1a. Which article are you evaluating? (provide a link to the article):

Musée de l'Homme

1b. Websites relevant to your evaluation (e.g., site of an institution or person’s biography):

National French Museum of Natural History (Musee de l’Homme is a department of this institution)

Musee de l'Homme (Official website)

2. Why have you chosen this article to evaluate?

I am avidly interested in French culture, and le Musée de l’Homme has a fascinating variety of exhibits. Additionally, this is a Start-class article with plenty of room for improvement. The institution is well-known enough that it will be possible to find various articles. At least two human remains have been repatriated in the 21st century. This has the potential to relate to ANTH 420’s later focus on repatriation efforts.

3. Evaluate Article:

Lead section

Rating: C

Weaknesses: The lead section is brief and only draws from a single source that is irrelevant to the overview. There is no reference on the lead page to the other sections of the article. The lead article refers to the research efforts currently pursued by the museum but shares no further details. This is a common theme throughout the lead article – something is stated but not explained at all. Even an overview should share specifics.

Recommendations: Add a few sentences to the lead section. Delete the final sentence of the section due to irrelevance and replace it with a pertinent conclusion.

Content

Rating: C

Weaknesses: The history section needs to be polished. There are five sub-sections with an unbalanced amount of information. For example, one sub-section is barely a paragraph, whereas the others have much more content. The mission section is substantial but needs more sources. The notable holdings section requires more detail, and I’m not certain of the relevance of the ‘Notable directors and staff scientists’ section.

Recommendations: Either delete or add to the sub-sections located beneath history. Add citations to the mission section.

Tone and Balance

Rating: B

Weaknesses: The article attempts to maintain an objective voice and primarily succeeds. However, the article seems to editorialize for the Mission section.

Recommendations: Supplement the Mission section with additional citations. Add neutral language that compares the educational mission of le Musee de l’homme to the mission of Quai Branly museum.

Sources and References

Rating: B

Weaknesses: Sources are primarily newspapers and magazines. However, these are balanced by a variety of peer reviewed sources. The quality of citations is not in question, but the quantity is.

Recommendations: Conduct additional research to find references for Mission section of article.

Organization and Writing

Rating: B

Weaknesses: The history section in particular lacks organization and detail. Writing style remains objective throughout, but sources aren’t always relevant.

Recommendations: Provide estimated dates for ‘Earlier Collections’ sub-section for thematic consistency (all other history sub-sections have estimated dates). Incorporate additional sources and verify relevance of current sources.

Images and Media

Rating: C

Weaknesses: Primary image for article is cropped poorly and does not give good indication of what the museum looks like. Images of ‘Notable holdings’ are absent. Only three images present in entire article.

Recommendations: Upload higher quality image of the institution. Find and upload images of a few of the notable holdings. Add more images to contextualize the museum.

Talk page discussion

Rating: Start

Weaknesses: All WikiProjects associated with the article classify it as Start-class, Low-importance. This would explain the intermittent commentary (last update was in 2017) and general lack of dialogue present on talk page.

Recommendations: Editing the article and upgrading class from S to C should result in more interest from connected projects.

Overall impressions

Rating: Start

Weaknesses: History section lacks detail and organization. The Mission section shows promise, but needs additional references and more objective language.

Recommendations: Major revisions to History and Mission sections with an emphasis on reliable and relevant sources.

Resources for Each Project Topic Category

Institutional histories of museums:

Projects:

Resource Pages: List of museums with major collections in ethnology and anthropology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_museums_with_major_collections_in_ethnography_and_anthropology)

“Good Content” example: Indianapolis Museum of Art (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indianapolis_Museum_of_Art), rated by WikiProjects Museums.

Biographies

Projects:

Resource Pages:

“Good Content” example: