User:HanSharma/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: Trojan Horse
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article as this story of the Trojan Horse has always been something of interest to me. My earliest memories of studying ancient history during my early school years is based on the Trojan Horse, the story has always stood out to me.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and easy to read, not overly detailed as the details come later on in the page.

Lead evaluation
Nice, straightforward introduction of the article. Summarizes all important and relevant topics surrounding the main tropic, Trojan Horse, to which it further details later on.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes. Citations include information being collected from this year (2020)
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes. The article contains information from multiple sources detailing various stories regarding the Trojan Horse. Stories to which some are detailed form underrepresented Greek historians such as Pausanias who insisted that the Trojan Horse was used as a battering ram.

Content evaluation
The content is interesting and organized. It displays multiple sides to the story with sufficient sourcing.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
The article does a good job staying neutral to the topic. Nothing seems biased or over/under presented. Information is conducted in a neutral manner with sufficient details to back up. Since the Trojan Horse is more of a story, the article makes sure to not be heavily bias to one researchers interpretations and instead lists numerous variations of the story for readers to follow along and make interpretations up for themselves.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, citations from 2020 are present.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes,
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
The sources I clicked on do indeed send me to historical databases which seem legit. Lots of various citations from a diverse spectrum of authors have been put into this article to better detail this story.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Organization evaluation
As explained earlier, the article had a very concise lead that provided sufficient information of important details. The lead allowed for a good flow of the article. It was easy to ready and the information points were well transitioned from one another.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Kind of. Maybe more too organized than visually appealing

Images and media evaluation
The article did a good job providing various pictures of the Trojan Horse depicting various literary accounts. Though the pictures seemed to be strictly placed one a top of each other on the right side of the article. Though it does look more organized, the article does not look as visually appealing in this way. The pictures themselves were good, they had simple captions that went straight to the point of the picture.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Many people are providing their own opinions on the story / event of the Trojan Horse. Some people want some words being taken out and some word incorporated.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Ancient Greek religion and mythology are strong topics in this class within where Trojan Horse takes place. We have also learned a lot about Troy, Sparta, and the Odysseus which are relevant to this topic.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The wiki displays multiple literacy accounts of the Trojan Horse to some which I have not learned about in class.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page was interesting to look at. It was interesting to see what other historical experts or people who were simply just invested into this research had to say. They had their own beliefs and information that they thought would be relevant to add. Some even disagreed with some elements in this article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * I really enjoyed reading this article. It was simple to read and straight forward. It provided all necessary details for me to better and clearly understand the Trojan Horse. It was organized, well thought out, and detailed. It provided multiple aspects of the stories that I had never heard of before. It kept me intrigued and wanting to learn more.


 * What is the article's overall status? The article has been rated start class and high importance in Greece, Rome, and Mythology
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Its easiness to read. Lead. Organized. Interesting.
 * How can the article be improved? Picture display. Split literary accounts?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Well developed.

Overall evaluation
With how well established the story/ event of the Trojan Horse is, I believe editors have done a good job coming together to make this article. It has its strong strengths and is complete.

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: