User:Jonah Kutell/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: Sand mandala
 * I decided to evaluate this article because it highlights the intricacies of life which stem from creation and destruction. Sand mandalas represent the pathway and movement of life through it's phases and it are these factors which make them beautiful.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead in the introduction is straight and to the point in describing the role of sand mandalas, quite concise and does a good job omitting minor details. It does a sufficient job giving the idea but fails to list the other important sections. In the lead paragraph there is a portion which mentions that the mandalas represent the transitory nature of life which is important in Buddhism, this hasn't been mentioned in the rest of the article.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article is recent and was last updated in June of 2020 so there is definitely up to date information regarding sand mandalas. Everything within the body of the article was relevant to the main topic and described the mandala's different facets. I believe that examples of the stories told by mandalas would definitely add to the article and are missing. Buddhists are definitely an underrepresented population and are in the religious minority in America.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article maintains a neutral tone consistently throughout the body and introduction. It remained unbiased and seemed focused on the facts of the art and ritual of sand mandalas. No artists were promoted and it seemed that there was nothing that was done to persuade.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The sources are quite limited. It seems there is only one major source and that was a book on Tibetan and Buddhist history. This is not a secondary source but includes many authors from the Tibetan region which is a marginalized region. There are not any links and the source is actually older, published in 1992. Despite this, due to tradition and the passing of rituals to subsequent generations, the ritual and art of sand mandalas remain pretty much the same.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

Overall, the article provided a short and concise explanation of sand mandalas, their purpose, materials and how they are made. Grammatical errors are few and the subtopics are all major points which are crucial to the main idea of what the mandalas are meant to portray.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

Images included show the intricate patterns and geometric patterns which tell the stories of the Buddhist deities. Images such as these are crucial to understand what differentiates a mandala from other forms of art, especially when the entire circle is shown. The captions provide context as to the artist and location of the pieces. The layout across the page really add to the visual interest as it seems to bring the page to life in a way. All the images contain hyperlinks to their sources and any other pertinent information.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The talk page has two mild criticisms of an earlier draft of the article. Both of these criticisms are about an earlier tone which was removed, one such criticism pointed out that the author should remove the term amazing from an image description. As far as I can see, this article doesn't have a rating as it is a pretty small article. The discussions in the Wikipedia page are different from class conversations as they are centered around notability and validity and remaining neutral, in class reactions, emotions and thoughts on topics are encouraged.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall, I was truly impressed with the article, I've been an avid fan of art history and mathematics my entire life so learning a bit more about specific, geometrically accurate depictions of Buddhist stories of creation and destruction spoke to me personally. The article was very accurate in it's descriptions of sand mandalas but failed in several ways. It could've used better sources, and personally I would've gotten a lot more from the article if it described the history behind it. The article is well written but slightly underdeveloped as it could be more full in regards to it's use of sources, description of history and in the description of certain mandala's stories.


 * 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?

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: