User:Kdotlamar39/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: 2020 United States racial unrest
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because our country is currently experiencing the most heightened racial tension/unrest in my 21 years of life. As a Black person this topic/article speaks to me on a deeper level because I am witnessing the nationwide and systemic violation of our human rights.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead has an introductory sentence that succinctly outlines the topic of the article. It does not have an explicit description of the article's major sections but it touches upon what is mentioned in later sections, so the reader has an idea of what is to come. There is no information in the Lead that is not mentioned in the subsequent sections of the article. While there are a lot of names in the Lead that might be a bit hard to keep track of for someone not familiar with all of the information, it is still concise and gets the point across in a timely fashion.


 * 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's content is very relevant to the topic. Everything mentioned in the article is necessary to a deeper understanding of what is currently happening in the US. The content is also up-to-date which is paramount for this article since most of its content has transpired within the past few months/is still ongoing. There is content that highlights racial unrest in 2 European nations; initially they might stand out, but the article uses them to show how the racial unrest in the US has sparked movements worldwide. It is important to understand the global impact of what is happening in the US so I do not think there is any extraneous content in this article. The article focuses on issues related to historically underrepresented populations (Black people in the US).


 * 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

I would say the article is overwhelmingly neutral. One line that caught my attention is "The 2020 United States racial unrest is an ongoing wave of civil unrest, comprising of protests and riots, against perceived systemic racism towards black people"; I am not sure what the contributor meant with 'perceived', but the word perceived might indicate a slight bias because perceived implies that some might perceive the current climate as rife with systemic racism, while others might perceive that there is no systemic racism. Aside from this, the article presented a lot of data and objective information that maintains a neutral tone. For the pure sake of argumentation, this article doesn't really delve into the counter-movements that have arisen as a result of these protests against police brutality. For example, many have adopted 'Back the Blue', a subsidiary of 'Blue Lives Matter'. Additionally, there has been a rise of white vigilantism that has been encouraged by Donald Trump's incendiary rhetoric against the protests. The article briefly mentions the shooting of Jacob Blake but does not mention the details (instead, it provides a link to the Wikipedia page dedicated to the murder of Jacob Blake). I do not think the article attempts to persuade the reader in one direction or another. It simply outlines the current situation and why things are happening the way they are. It gives a timeline for events and provides objective data as well.


 * 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 favour of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

While a lot of the content is backed up by other Wikipedia pages, the article used multiple external sources to corroborate its information and content. I noticed many news outlets, local and national, that were referred to whilst writing this article (the Washington Post and New York Times were 2 for example). All the sources seem appropriate for the content of this article. They are current as well, with some secondary sources published as recently as last week. This article is an ongoing and ever-changing subject, so it's important that the sources they reference are new as well. One link did not work/was taking too long to load, but the others worked fine and I was able to track where information came from both with the citations within the article and the list of sources at the bottom.


 * 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 marginalised individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The writing style is clear and easy to understand. I did not detect any major grammar mistakes, and nothing appeared to be spelled incorrectly. It is broken down very nicely, both with the table of contents panel and the clearly defined sections throughout the article.


 * 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-organised - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The images are all located in one location which looks a bit busy. They could be dispersed throughout the article in their appropriate sections instead of grouping them all together in the same place. This would also serve to break up the larger blocks of text and make the article more accessible to the reader. However, there is a caption provided for each image. The images do adhere to Wikipedia's regulations; when I click on the images, it provides me with the information of the creator (who took the pictures), along with other 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

There are conversations surrounding the best order to present the protests in. Some believe this year's protests should be presented chronologically, while others think they should be ordered in terms of importance/how big they were. Additionally, others are having an intellectual debate about 'Black' vs 'black' and what each term means/entails. Lastly, as I had mentioned above, there is a conversation about whether or not to include the international responses to racial unrest in the US. Some believe it is fine to include this info within the article, while others argue the page might get too busy if they include countries and should instead provide links to other pages that deal with other countries. The article is of interest to 9 WikiProjects.


 * 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, the article is still undergoing massive changes because the content is still ongoing. Strengths: the article is very concise and gets the point very quickly. Additionally, it is easy to navigate due to clearly defined sections. It needs to be improved because some areas are very sparse in content and lack sufficient substance. The presentation of images is also a bit messy and can be organised better throughout the entire article instead of one jumble at the top of the page. I would say it is moderately developed but still needs further reinforcements/detail that fully underscores the number of murders/deaths/abuse of the law in these past few months.


 * 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: