User:Juliansalvarez/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: Incan agriculture
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Wanted to evaluate this article due to its relevance as background for this course.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The lead includes a concise opening sentence that makes clear that the topic of the article is Incan agriculture and the historical forces that lead to the creation of these practices. However, there's isn't a clear discussion of the article subsections in the lead. Instead, it provides more of a general overview without touching on things like technology. It doesn't include any information that can't be found elsewhere in the article, but it does use different language such as describing who the Sapa Inka is. Still, it's fairly concise and provides a useful summary.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
The article as a whole is concise and focused on Inca agriculture. The important aspects, like environment and history, are discussed and there are no clear areas that are missing from the entry. The article is up to date since there are few new archaeological or historical findings that would change the way that one would understand Inca agriculture. I would argue that it does, in fact, relate to an underrepresented population, that being the indigenous peoples of the former Inca empire/of South America generally. This history is important to understanding modern societies and inequities, even if something like agriculture may not seem directly related.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article strikes a neutral tone, presenting facts essentially as they are without editorializing. There isn't a clear a bias on how the facts of Inca Agriculture are discussed, focusing on the historical and social processes that influenced the farming practices of the Inca as an imperial force. There isn't a sense that the author(s) have an agenda, so it assumes that the reader knows little about the topic rather than having a preconceived notion of Inca agriculture.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
All the sources seem legitimate, with a good mix of scholarly articles and books to back up the facts presented. The sources capture the breadth of scholarly study on the topic as they should. Most of the sources used are from within the last 20 years, although there are some older sources that inform the article as well. Furthermore, it includes several indigenous authors in the bibliography as well as several Latin American scholars. 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
The article is very clear and not difficult to read. There are no obvious spelling errors, and the subsections are logical with the exception of "Food Security," which seemed better described by "Food Storage" or another such title.

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 images are helpful in that they show, for example, the environment and some of the farming techniques and tools. They are given brief captions which are clear, and all images are in the public domain.

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 discussion doesn't seem particularly active, with much of the discussion having been resolved and relating to the ways that the article has been expanded to include a wider range of topics such as crop selection. It is a part of the wikiprojects on Peru, Indigenous peoples of the Americas, and Agriculture. They're rated class C. Fundamentally, because the article is mostly a presentation of facts, it goes into more depth than we have in class on things like farming implements, but doesn't differ much in how the subject matter is talked about.

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 a useful primer on Inca empire farming techniques and agricultural practices. It is clear, concise, and wastes no time in its presentation of the facts. It does, however, lack somewhat in context about what the Inca empire was aside from a few mentions to the allyus and the imperial structure. In other words, the "organization" subsection could use expanding. It is short, but is well-developed and 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 — ~


 * Link to feedback: