User:Jlpratt116/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: Parasyte
 * I have chosen to evaluate the article based on the manga/anime version of Parasyte because I was finding it difficult choosing a topic, and when I came across the Article under the C-Class options, I felt comfortable enough reviewing it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * The Lead introduces the topic clearly and concisely as the first sentence of: "Parasyte (Japanese: 寄生獣, Hepburn: Kiseijū, lit. "Parasitic Beasts") is a Japanese science fiction horror manga series written and illustrated by Hitoshi Iwaaki and published in Kodansha's Morning Open Zōkan and Afternoon magazine from 1988 to 1995." which gives background and introduces the topic.

Lead evaluation

 * The Lead has a contents section underneath it. however does not mention the main sections in its body
 * The Lead does not include information that is not present in the article.
 * The Lead goes as far as to give background on the subject, but not too much past that. It leaves the information to be in the main body of the article.

Content evaluation

 * The article Is relevant to the topic, it contains all the pieces that are found in the table of contents, however, the plot section is shorter than expected for the series at two paragraphs.
 * The article is as up to date as possible, as there are no new developments in the series past 2016
 * As stated before the article's plot section does not cover the plot of the entire series, but rather a setup for the rest of the series, and only really gives information found in the first episode of the anime

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral and tries not give an overview of the series without revealing major plot points.

There isn't really a bias found in the article, it is gives accurate information as presented by the fictional universe of the topic.

There aren't really viewpoints over or under represented, however, the fact that it is written as if it does not want to give away more than it has to creates a lack of information in the plot and character sections as stated in the talk section of the article.

The article does not attempt to persuade the reader explicitly, but the lack of information leads me to believe that by making the information vague enough the reader will want to watch/read the series.

Sources and references evaluation
The lead nor the plot contains secondary sourcing. For the most part sourcing is done on people's names or publications. The sources currently there are reliable, but there could be more.

Due to the little availability of analysis by a reliable source the article does little analysis. With that said, there could be more sourcing for character information from sites that also give an overview of the series and its characters.

The sources are as up to date as the topic information, but some of the character links could be better.

The links work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * 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?

Organization evaluation
As stated before the main content in the article is vague, as to not give too much information away, which does not make it as easy to read or find information easily.

The article seems to be free of blatant grammatical or spelling errors for the most part.

The article is well organized, but could be improved by having linked sub sections (like parasytes/normal characters), but other than that the article is well organized.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
The article only contains one image in the side information box. It may be beneficial for the page to put images after each characters' synopsis.

The one image is well captioned.

Yes, the one image is a manga cover on the public domain.

No, there needs to be more images to make it visually appealing.

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
The talk page raised concerns as to the vagueness of sections of the article, but no changes have been made in light of these posts.

The article is C-class but is compliant with the requirements for B-class. It is part of the Anime and Manga WikiProject.

The article does not give specific details that would be beneficial it the article was being used for research if someone were trying to find out more about the parasyte series. Unlike some of the articles we have read in class the article intentionally withholds known information that would be beneficial to the reader.

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 article is unfinished, though the people observing it are keeping it vague intentionally, it makes the article an inefficient resource.

The article does a good job giving a general overview of the topics.

The article could go more in depth on most of the topics

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: