User:KatyTravers/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Talk:Lore Olympus

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it's a great web series and I'm shocked it's C Class.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:

The lead section is great it goes over the summary and the awards that the series has won. It's very neutral and it doesn't have bias toward Lore Olympus.

Content

Surprisingly, there isn't that much content there is a basic plotline and character list. It's pretty bare since there is a lot to talk about such as the upcoming adaptation. There's a lot that could be added plotline wise as well as the character list and the upcoming events to the series such as the merch line from Hot Topic.

Tone and Balance

There is a neutral point of view but not scholarly the vocabulary doesn't always match. Some areas are better than others there is not a lot of balance it switches tone. Some areas are better written than others.

Sources and References

The article does not have referencing and citations met and it doesn't have supporting materials. This article is of Mid-importance.

This is supported by the Webcomics work group which means that eventually it will be a higher a higher article in the future due to the masses willing to update it.

Organization and writing quality

The organization is similar to other Wikipedia articles but the writing quality differs depending on the area. The lead section is great but the characters section is lacking.

Images and Media

There is one photo in this article but could be very full with images of at least the main characters since Persephone and Hades have been iconic in their looks since the rise of this comic's popularity.

Talk Page Discussion

The talk page is moved to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/Webcomics work group and it has reviews of the page as well as asking for more help on the article.

It's a bit more informal than the ones discussed in class.

Overall Impressions.

The page obviously is made by real fans of the series but it's either they are inexperienced to writing Wikipedia articles or they're younger writers because the lack of depth that I'm used to on normal Wikipedia articles isn't there. It needs more depth with more writers and more detail but also more sources. I'm not sure if that's because they isn't any because web comics are a new form of reading. In that case it's not the Web Comics Work Group but also I can understand how thin they must be spread there are thousands of comics and they just need more people in order to make this article move up in class.