User:Jakes22/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: (link) Principles of Islamic jurisprudence
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because it's relevant to a thesis paper which I intend to write.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes it does.
 * 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 concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? It is. Any Arabic terminology which was mentioned in brief gets a more detailed description further down the article.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes. The sources this article utilizes are relatively new (1985-2014), barring any classical sources which it may also utilize.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Almost everything appears in order. The article also manages to mention extinct sects of Islam and their influence on current Islamic jurisprudence. Embedded links to other Wikipedia pages are also prevalent, however I feel that an embedded link should be provided for "Abū 'Ubaid al-Qāsim b. Sallām" in the section "Evolution of methods", and also for "al-Muhaqqiq al-Isfahani" and "Muhammad Rida al-Muzaffar" in the section titled "Parts of the Shiite Uşūl al-Fiqh"

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The article is neutral. The article gives an overview the various Islamic sects, further subdivisions, and the forms of jurisprudence practiced according to each group.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * 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? This article is very balanced.

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? Yes.
 * 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? Very.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
 * 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? Yes

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 conversations occurring behind the scenes include requests on giving a more detailed explanation on key differences held by significant figures, considerations on adding additional concepts relevant to the topic that might provide a more complete and precise description of the topic, and an argument is provided regarding whether or not two concepts are distinct and should be treated as such, or whether they are essentially the same thing. The user argues for the former. A last comment on the talk page acknowledges a description of the topic that they find redundant.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? C-class, and it is apart of two Wikiprojects (Wikiproject Islam and Wikiproject Law)
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Great
 * What are the article's strengths? It's comprehensive and concise.
 * How can the article be improved? A few names should receive embedded links.
 * how would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Well-developed

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 — ~ Is there any substantial evidence which would support the traditional view that al-Shafi'i is responsible for founding Islamic jurisprudence?


 * Link to feedback: Talk:Principles of Islamic jurisprudence