User:Hhalpern2412/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Fabula (journal)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I'm currently working on an undergraduate Classical journal, and so I decided to look at the Wikipedia page of a professional publication in the humanities. I think it's important to be able to find information about publications one may want to submit to, so as to get a sense of their content and to see whether one's writing may cover the subjects that particular journal tends to showcase. My preliminary impression of this article is that it is quite sparse and poorly formatted.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is a poorly constructed. While the introductory sentence does provide some basic background, some of the information that one might expect in the first two sentences (publisher, editor, date of first publication) are presented a paragraph (albeit a very short one) down. The lead also doesn't provide a description of the article's major sections, as there are no sections, really. The entire article is limited just to a long lead section composed of many short paragraphs.

The bulk of the content is dedicated to some basic information, a statistic or two, and to a list of twelve Abstracting & Indexing Services that Fabula is abstracted and indexed in, which seems...irrelevant.

Given the tiny amount of content presented in the article, I'm not surprised to see that there are only three citations, but if there were more information in the article, it would obviously need many more citations. There's also too little content for any tonal issues; there's just no room for biases in so few words.

Generally, I would say that the article is underdeveloped. Some of the information listed above (publisher, editor, date of first publication) should be moved to the introductory paragraph, which should make up the entirety of the lead section. There should then be subsections regarding the history of the journal's creation, the content of the journal, and some relevant statistic, respectively. So the biggest change that needs to occur is that this article needs to be restructured.