User:Jbo33/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.

I am doing a class activity.


 * Name of article: The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I read the book in the past and enjoyed the concepts it brought to light.

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?
 * Concise

Lead evaluation
The lead effectively introduces the article in an informative, yet concise, manner. It gives an overview for the content of the book, as well as the critical acclaim and backlash that goes along with it. All the information is relevant and expanded upon in the content of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, citing sources from 2018 and edited as recently as today.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes

Content evaluation
The content of the article spells out everything relevant for the book. The plot, background, and character sections are spot on and effectively give an overview for the content in the book. The article also serves to deal with Wikipedia's equity gap, as the book surrounds a boy from the historically underrepresented population of Native Americans, and brings to light the sensitive topics that surround this group. These topics center around poverty and unequal representation; however, they stem out further as well. The article has been updated as recently as today, 09/30/2020, and includes sources from as recent as 2018.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral. It does bring to light the high praise the article has received, while also including sufficient detail into the controversy that surrounds the book regarding poverty, disability, alcoholism, and more. There is no language in the article that attempts to sway the audience in favor of one position or another.

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
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * think so.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * no

Sources and references evaluation
The facts in the article are backed up by reliable, thorough, and current sources. The author of the novel himself is part of a historically marginalized group, although it is unclear if the other sources include people from the same background. One source "https://civilrights.org/archives/2010/10/1073-indian-diary.html" does not work and should be fixed, although it seems as if the article was deleted after it was cited on this page.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes

Organization evaluation
The article is well very organized from top to bottom. It is coherent, understandable, and is divided in an intelligible way. There are some minor grammatical errors, but nothing so significant that it inhibits the reader's ability to understand the content. With that said, they should be fixed.

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

Images and media evaluation
There are three well captioned images within the article, all of which serve to enhance the understanding of the book. They include visually appealing images of the book, author, and the current geographical location of the indigenous people the book involves. The images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. An image that depicts the controversy surrounding the book would be beneficial; however, it is unclear if such a picture exists that also adheres the the copyright regulations.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
There is little current talk on the talk page of the article. In fact, one of the last edits comes from this same course in 2018. The article is rated as C class and is part of the Indigenous Peoples of North America, Novels, and Children's literature WikiProjects. The talk page does refer to the censorship controversy regarding this novel, so the talk page is actually similar to the way we have talked about it in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
The overall evaluation of this article is good. Although some things need to be cleaned up such as invalid sources and minor grammatical errors, the strengths of the article heavily outweigh the weaknesses. These strengths include doing an above adequate job of laying out the context, content, and controversy that come along with the book. The article is complete, however, I do think the film adaptation section could be developed, as a big name like Hugh Jackman is signed on the play a role in the film, yet it is not mentioned in the article. Admittedly, this is minor part of a minor section, so overall the article is complete.

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 — ~

I posted on the talk page, not sure if I was supposed to link to it here or if "Link to feedback" is for professor.


 * Link to feedback: