User:KelseyL9/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
All American Boys

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article is about one of the top banned books, "All American Boys." I was interested to see how the book was represented on Wikipedia and if bias was present.

Evaluate the article
Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

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, it provides an overview of the themes of the book and the information in the article.

Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn’t.) No

Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise, 3 sentences

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes

Is the content up-to-date? Yes, except for the Censorship section

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think the Plot section could be expanded and the Censorship section should include more examples of censorship issues at different schools.

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes, the article mentions police brutality, racism, and protesting.

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Is the article neutral? Yes

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No

Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? The article shows both sides of the censorship argument.

Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes

Are the sources current? Yes

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes

Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) Yes

Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

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

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? Yes

Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There is one editor who plans on writing more, but no other conversations exist.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is part of WikiProject Novels, WikiProject African diaspora, WikiProject Law Enforcement, WikiProject Children’s literature, and WikiProject Black Lives Matter. This article has a c-class rating with low importance.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? No

Overall impressions

What is the article's overall status? Good, but could use development.

What are the article's strengths? Correct and understandable information

How can the article be improved? Updated information about censorship at schools from both sides of the argument

How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that this article has a great foundation, but can be developed more.

Examples of good feedback

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Overall Feedback: Overall, this article provides the basic information needed to understand what “All American Boys” is about. The page covers its major themes and why some view it as a controversial book. However, the article only mentions two instances where this book has been banned and in both situations the ban was overruled. Being on the list for the most commonly banned books in the United States, I’m sure that more information exists about censorship. Yet, information about schools that still have this book banned is probably lacking in terms of quality sources. The article is organized and has credible sources.