User:Ikura24/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: A Brief History of Chinese Fiction
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * As we're studying the Chinese fiction Family this term, it's wothy of taking a look at this article.

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?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Not that I know of.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No, and no.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * It is.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I don't think so.
 * 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.

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?
 * They were written in the 1980s and 2000s, so I think they are current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Some sources were written by non-Chinese authors and some were written by Chinese, but there can be more reliable sources. No, they do not include historically marginalized individuals.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * I think it is.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, but there are some punctuation errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It is well-organized.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, the photo of the cover of the book.
 * 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?
 * There is only one image in the article.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There is no conversation shown on the talk page.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated C-class by WikiProject Books, WikiProject Literature and WikiProject China. Yes, it is a part of those three WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * There is no discussion shown on the talk page.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is finished and substantial.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is concise and easy to read, and its sources are reliable.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More details of the book can be provided, for example, the content of the book can be explained rather than laying out its chapters. Also, there should be more reliable sources.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is poorly developed and should be improved.

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: