User:HarryJL/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Phenomenology (philosophy)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because I am a philosophy major currently studying this very subject. Phenomenology is notoriously difficult to get into and difficult to understand, but having a clearer understanding of consciousness is very important. My preliminary impression of this article is that it is well made, however it may focus too much on Husserl and not enough on the other major players.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

The first sentence of this article summarizes phenomenology as concisely as is possible. The lead section does not exactly outline the rest of the article, however. It does explain that phenomenology is not a unified movement, but it does not elaborate on this point. No unnecessary information is included in the lead, and it is not overly detailed.

Content

As far as content is concerned, the article suffices as a decent introduction. Considering that there are entire articles on the different branches of phenomenology, it is not necessary that this article elaborates on these branches unnecessarily. The article makes no mention of Frege’s influence on Husserl, however. I think this is relevant information. There may be value in including more information about what phenomenology is not, considering that it is rather esoteric.

Tone and Balance

Given the obscure concepts involved in the subject, I find the way this article is written to be very clear and uncomplicated. It does not appear biased. The composition of the article however does not have that certain kind of flow to it, and things feel somewhat fragmented. I would like to see more cohesion and smoother transitions if that is possible.

Sources and References

Things appear well sited and sourced, but there perhaps could be more citations throughout. It is not so clear to me as I am reading that what I am reading is

Organization and Writing Quality

The article is written well but has minor grammatical errors. Many sentences could be rephrased or more clearly articulated. Especially with this subject, precision with word choice is key.

Images and Media

The article includes some portraits of Husserl, Heidegger and Ponty, but that is it. There are no other graphics included in the article. They are well captioned and good to see at the outset, but I cannot say that their layout is too visually appealing.

Talk Page Discussion

Philosophy is not something that everyone can agree on, so lengthy discussion must be had to come to an agreement on a particular interpretation of any given idea. This might be especially true for phenomenology considering most of what is written about it is almost done so using what seems like another language.

Overall Impressions

This article suffices as a decent introduction to phenomenology. It does not boil the subject down into something too simplistic, nor does it cut it out to be impenetrable. It is written well and clearly, and it covers a lot of important information. I do feel however that there is a lack of balance and unity to the whole article, and that some important information is left out. This of course is an inarticulate feeling, and not something I can substantiate too well considering I am not a phenomenology expert at all. I would say it is shy of being “complete.”