User:J3nn!f3rros3/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: Tecumseh
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article, as Tecumseh was a prominent leader in a significant time, and it would be significantly damaging if this page was not accurate and of high quality.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead includes an introductory sentence with a clear and concise topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No. The article's major sections are early life and family background, early experiences, Tenskwatawa and Prophetstown, Tecumseh's War, War of 1812, Death, Legacy, Speeches attributed, Honors and memorials, In popular culture. However, the Lead mainly touches upon early life and background, Tecumseh's war, and death.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is fairly concise, however again goes into detail about specific content sections and not others.

Lead evaluation
This lead includes an introductory sentence with a clear and concise topic. However, the Lead does not include a brief description of all of the article's major sections, and instead has a detailed description of a few, but not all sections. All information introduced is later expanded, and within the content it does provide it is fairly concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Not all of the content is specifically relevant to Tecumseh. For example, there is a mention of his father and following a description/translation of his name. There is also a very large subsection for Tecumseh's brother, Tenskwatawa.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * the content is up to date, though there was a bit of criticism on the talk page regarding politically correct terms, which may show it is out of date in regards to its terminology.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I believe there is a missed opportunity to expand upon the Pan-Native American campaign, as it is only a paragraph long.
 * 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 deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps as it is about Tecumseh, one of the most significant Native American leaders and a huge advocate and symbol for Pan-Native American alliances.

Content evaluation
Overall, the article content could be more concise, and focus more on the subject matter at hand, Tecumseh himself. The content is relatively up-to-date, despite a few terminology points that are no longer acceptable. The article deals with an equity gap, as Tecumseh was such a prominent leader of the Pan-Native American alliance that this content is extremely important.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article's tone is fairly neutral. This is a difficult thing to evaluate, especially in regards to such a prominent in figure in human rights activism, but I would say this article did a very good job of remaining neutral. It could be of question to see if there is overly-aggressive language used to discuss the war patterns of Indigenous groups, however it is hard to discern between this and a description the wars and battles occurring at this time.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * It is a bit difficult to evaluate this as it is completely discussing Tecumseh's motivations and sides of the battle. I believe there could be more opportunity to expand upon the motives of the other side.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Again, this is a bit difficult to examine in this context, but I believe there is a moderate tone used throughout this overrepresentation of Tecumseh's mission.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The article describes Tecumseh in a very honorable light. This could be perceived as persuasion of his politics.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, The article's tone is fairly neutral. This is a difficult thing to evaluate, especially in regards to such a prominent in figure in human rights activism. It could be of question to see if there is overly-aggressive language used to discuss the war patterns of Indigenous groups, however it is hard to discern between this and a description the wars and battles occurring at this time. It is a bit difficult to evaluate as it is completely discussing Tecumseh's motivations and sides of the battle. I believe there could be more opportunity to expand upon the motives of the other side. The article describes Tecumseh in a very honorable light. This could be perceived as persuasion of his politics.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes. Almost every sentence is cited with reliable sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * After clicking through many of the sources, I conclude there is a wide variety of available literature. There are multiple sources that are cited multiple times, though this may reflect quality sources.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are mostly current, though there is significant variety in the dates of published material that is cited, from early 1900s to mid 2000s.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * The sources are overwhelmingly written by men, which is maybe very common, and I believe many of them are white men. I am not sure what kind of literature is available, but I believe this has an opportunity to be diversified.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Every link I checked works.

Sources and references evaluation
Overall, this article has good citations, though they lack diversity in regards to writers. The writes are overwhelmingly white men, though this may only be a reflection of the work force in this field, if that is the case. Every link I checked worked and was up to date.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is well-written. Again, I felt that there were some points that had too much detail and others where I would like to see more, but overall it was easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, the article is well-organized by section.

Organization evaluation
Overall, the article is well-written. I did not notice any grammatical or spelling errors, and the article was well-organized by section. I felt as thought some sections were longer than necessary, and others were a bit shorts, but overall it was very easy to read.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * These images are relevant, though not always necessary. For example, a portrait of Tecumseh is repeated twice. However, none are distracting.
 * 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?
 * I would prefer them to be spaced more evenly throughout the article.

Images and media evaluation
Overall, the media and images in this article are fair. There is nothing strikingly beneficial to them but they are not distracting. It appears as though they are well captioned and adhere to copyright regulations. I would prefer for them to be more evenly spaced throughout the article, though this is minor.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The talk page has not been super active in recent years, but past topics include the accuracy of the description and naming of Tecumseh in regards to his heritage and leadership. There are also a bit of contradictions pointed out years ago.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article is rated as a level-4 vital article, and as C-Class. It is part of many WikiProjects, including US/Indiana/Ohio, Military history, Indigenous peoples of North America, Religion, Military, and Indiana Historical Society.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia focuses very much on only the case of Tecumseh, whereas when we discussed this figure in class it had an overarching theme with huge significance in regards to the Pan-Native American Alliance, and overall unification of Indigenous groups.

Talk page evaluation
Overall, the talk page has not been super active in recent years, but past topics include the accuracy of the description and naming of Tecumseh in regards to his heritage and leadership. There are also a bit of contradictions pointed out years ago. This article is rated as a level-4 vital article, and as C-Class. It is part of many WikiProjects, including US/Indiana/Ohio, Military history, Indigenous peoples of North America, Religion, Military, and Indiana Historical Society.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall, I think the article is too detailed about the wrong things, and has room for improvement, though it is substantial as of now.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * I believe a strength of the article is its depth and detail. There are a many sections, all of which are very detailed.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I believe the article could be improved by having more of a centralized focus on Tecumseh himself. There are also areas that could better reflect the greater influence of the Pan-Native American Alliance, and how significant this truly was.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I believe the article is very well-developed. As I said, it is very detailed and has many different focuses.

Overall evaluation

 * Overall, I think the article is too detailed about the wrong things, and has room for improvement, though it is substantial as of now. I believe a strength of the article is its depth and detail. There are a many sections, all of which are very detailed. I believe the article could be improved by having more of a centralized focus on Tecumseh himself. There are also areas that could better reflect the greater influence of the Pan-Native American Alliance, and how significant this truly was. I believe the article is very well-developed. As I said, it is very detailed and has many different focuses.

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: