User:JoyousMuse/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:Ida Lewis
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I thought she lived an amazing life. I saw the problems on the talk page were illustrative.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? A lot of discussion went on in Talk page in February 2017. One result was a page move March 2017 (archived to not be corrected). Old comments were Aug 2006-Jan 2010.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes. One person thinks her first lifesaving at twelve could not be accurate, as the family was moved there when she was fifteen. However her father worked starting that year (1854) so it is possible she had visited, but there is no citation. In later years her father amused himself counting the people who came to the island to see Ida. He died in1873 so she was 31 and had married in 1870. There is no citation for this first paragraph.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes, female lighthouse keepers / rescuers / heroes. Salaries.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? She is described as a heroic lifesaver, and at one point the most highly paid lightkeeper, but these are cited.
 * 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? No (unless "the Bravest Woman in America", which seems warranted by other citations).

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, there are 21 citations.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Seems so.
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? 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? Yes
 * 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? In 2017, the problem with the woodcut or engraving being attributed to several sources is speculated to perhaps be "Victorian plagiarism". However I thought by the captions it was then corrected.
 * 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? There are criticisms and corrections displayed. One person wanted more filled in of her life before recognition (and some may have been added, not noted though). Two discrepancies I mention above, but there is also a discrepancy about the woodcut. One brings up the Google Doodle but others are in favor.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time (suggestions were made). Link says there are copyright violations and edit warring.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It seems to follow everything learned so far.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is not a stub, has 7 contents and four categories. good articles nominee.
 * What are the article's strengths? It was enjoyable to read, had sequence, and cited many books, newspapers, organizations, and a Google Doodle.
 * How can the article be improved? Further research to determine date discrepancies if possible, and if more information about her life than the fame can be found, this would enhance and fill out the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would have thought it was just fine before learning all this. I was drawn to it.

Overall evaluation
I learned about many aspects of Wikipedia editing by finding this remarkable article! There was a requested move and new section had title but no contributions. I believe Talk page has been inactive since 2017.

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: