User:KMag11/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: Aztlán
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * This article caught my attention since its inclusion in Wikipedia can help highlight underrepresented voices in digital media. It grapples with the issue of incorporating cultural fables and/or oral histories into academic writing, yet it is still notable since there are many academic articles written about Aztlan from a historical and social justice point of view.

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 is one concise paragraph, and the first sentence describes how Aztlan is the name for the Aztec homeland which is an appropriate summary of the rest of the article. The second sentence explains how Azteca means "people from Aztlan" in Nahuatl, which might include unrelated information since this article is more about the concept of Aztlan than the Aztecs or the Nahuatl language. The table of contents describes the sections of the article, however the introductory paragraph does not go over the sections of the article.

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
All of the content appears to be related to this article, however some details might be irrelevant. For example, a large paragraph is dedicated to a direct quotation of a story, which represents only one of several variations of that story. In addition, most of the content comes from sources published in the early 2000's or earlier, which is on the verge of becoming outdated and could benefit from supplementing these sources with more recent publications.

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
In general, the article does a good job of conveying how there are multiple viewpoints on this subject, and specifies when the article shifts from discussing one interpretation to another. I could not find any language that stood out as persuasive or leaning towards one interpretation more than another.

However, some phrases that could be reworded to be more neutral include the phrase "there are doubts about whether the place is purely mythical or represents a historical reality" from the introduction of the article. The word 'doubts' could be replaced with 'debates,' in order to convey that there are several points of view on the subject rather than a lack of knowledge. Additionally, the phrase "settled "near" Aztlan" should probably be reworded to remove the quotations around 'near,' which suggest either a direct quotation without a source or academic uncertainty. "Apparently contradict each other," and "Some say," in the second and third paragraphs of the 'Legend' section should also be revised to be more specific.

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
One concern that was brought up in the article's talk page is the inclusion of an article by a Neo-Nazi author. Editors were concerned about the dilemma of determining whether the source was necessary to include in the article and whether its author's viewpoint could detract from the neutrality of the article.

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 'Legend' and 'Etymology' sections appear sufficient, one concern is that the 'Legend' section is slightly lacking a unifying structure or could use clearer distinctions between different Aztlan interpretations. The 'Use by the Chicano movement' section could be expanded, given that editors discussed giving it its own article but eventually decided not to. This section could include more detail on the historical significance of Aztlan post-1960, although revising this section within the Aztlan article could overwhelm the article with an American perspective, which goes against Wikipedia's neutrality and content-gap guidelines.

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 first image of the historical drawing of Aztlan is an excellent complement to the article and has a detailed caption. However, the caption of the second figure, a map of the supposed location of Aztlan in the United States, could be misleading. The article emphasizes how there is not a consensus on the location of Aztlan, and maps might give a reader a false sense of certainty if not paired with a caption and surrounding text that emphasize the vague nature of the location.

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
This is a C-class article in the Mexico, Mesoamerica / Aztec, Indigenous peoples of the Americas and United States / Mexican Americans WikiProjects. Editors are discussing whether a Neo-Nazi authored source should be included in the bibliography, whether the 'Use by the Chicano movement' section should be made into its own article, and how the location of Aztlan should be portrayed within the article.

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
This article is fine as it is (in comparison to other stub articles), but could benefit from an updated bibliography, re-balancing of content focus, and a slight rephrasing of vague sentences. In particular, I think this article could be considered well-developed with the addition of missing citations and the expansion of the 'Use by the Chicano movement' section.

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: