User:Herbe1mg/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Egungun

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 choose this article because I had some previous knowledge on it. In our class we discussed this masquerade recently. I matters because it is an important part of the Yoruba people and has strong meaning to them. This festival is also a pretty major festival. I thought that some parts of the article were well written but others didn't really make much sense to.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Looking at the Lead part of this article comparing it to the aspects that are supposed to be in it there is some disconnect. While the lead starts off discussing what the masquerade actually is it ends up leading on to irrelevant information in the lead. This information is information that is not included anywhere else in this article. Within the lead they discuss how there is a different section of Egungun but don't actually talk about this any where else in the article or go into detail about how this is different than the traditional Yoruba Egungun. The lead also does not cover all of the points that are made later on in the article.

Content wise this article is kind of all over the place. In the part of the article which goes over Classifications it mentions different types of categories for the different egungun's but they don't actually tell you what these different categories are leaving this section to be about classification of the Egungun's but don't actually talk about the classifications at all. I feel like this would also be the category that the different communities outside of Africa that use Egungun would be talked about since we are talking about classifications but it is not mentioned. This section also has grammatical issues that make it hard to read. It has a long sentence joined together by semi colan The other part of the content that doesn't make the most sense to me is that they keep talking about women participating in these ceremonies singing or dancing. This is included in both the women's roles and the egungun ensemble sections. This information though is untrue because during the Egungun masquerade women are not allowed to attend and are not seen at them. They are preformed by men for men. This kind of content is kind of misleading and has false information. The pictures that are included that show the egungun are quite helpful and do display the traditional masquerade wear. They put a lot of detail in describing what the actual costumes would look like and then provided nice pictures so that there was a visual to back it up.

Some of the sources on this article seem to be quite good. They come from reputable sites like Jstor, but others are a little more questionable. There is one source that comes from Facebook and another source that leads to Vimeo. Neither of these sources are reputable sources or fit any of the criteria that is required of a good source for these articles. There are also a couple of news sources that are linked which are not great if you are looking for a good source. There is also a Yoruba (Teach Yourself Books) which while this one doesn't have a link I wouldn't trust this as the source to write my article with.

Overall this article has some work that needs to be done with it. The references need to be double checked and find replacements for the unreliable sources. The facts also need to be check throughout the article because women did not participate in these masquerades so including that would be false advertising. I feel like parts of the article like the part about the costumes was well written and described them pretty well. Some areas could maybe use a little more like talking about the different types of cloth but over all this was the best part of the article. I would say that this article is both under-developed and poorly developed because I think more information in general could be need but the information given some of it was wrong.