User:Jacques Blac/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: Roman graffiti (Roman graffiti)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have friends who are very into more modern street art and have gotten me more into it so I thought it would be fun to explore it more.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Kind of, it does the job of summarizing the definition of graffiti in archaeological terms but not its use specifically in Rome.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It mentions the use in Pompeii but does not connect to the other sections such as games or children.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Not necessarily, the article does not directly repeat the lead but it builds upon the information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is pretty concise but it has a good amount of information to build upon.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes it includes examples of Roman graffiti and its use.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * It was last edited on July 8, 2020 with the most recent source looking to be recorded in 2016.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The studying graffiti section seems not necessary but has the potential to be improved upon.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes I think that it represents a part of a culture that could be discussed more.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, I feel it is pretty neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Not necessarily, most entries are literal translations that I would need to research to see if they are correct.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Not that I could see through reading.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, it is pretty straightforward unbiased information.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Somewhat although there are some claims that I feel could benefit from a separate citation.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, most seem to be directly related to the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most sources are about 5-10 years old, due to this subject being very niche I am uncertain if it is rarely reported on or if these are the best sources available.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Most seem to be writers for academic journals or journalists. I do not see much reference to primary sources so I cannot tell that much about the authors of the Graffiti based on the article.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Some but not all work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it is pretty straight forward but could use some fixing up in some areas.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I could see besides maybe a few run on sentences.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * They are well organized although I think the translations might work better in tables rather than breaks in the text.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, there are a few images of Roman graffiti that show the style.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * They are brief, I wish they had a bit more information.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * From what I can tell yes except that one is listed as own work with public domain so it probably needs to be fixed.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Some are pretty bland to be honest. I think a description could help make it more dynamic.

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 are none.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated at a start class with low importance. It is a part of WikiProjects visual arts.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Not necessarily from what I can observe, we have barely mentioned graffiti so far to my knowledge.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Somewhat dull but has potential.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It has a decent amount of examples of Roman graffiti and images but they need to be displayed better.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Better displayed information and try to find more information from different sources.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Somewhat underdeveloped.

Overall evaluation
'''Try to give more examples and fix up some of the information already there. Try to remove some of the outdated links and information.'''

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: