User:KenDawg123/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Hypsos

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I Knew of the word Sublime, and wanted to learn more about the word, and the connections/important/view of the word over the past centuries. The article is important because it leads to the deeper explanation of and relevant connections with the word, along with the definition, background, and "Long term-effects" of the word. When I first saw the article I noticed how short it was, and noticed the lack of information the subsections had.

Evaluate the article
Lead: First sentence is a definition which is what the article is about, and although most of the information in the lead is not repeated later, it does set the tone of the era (ancient Greek) and gives insight that it is related to rhetorical and philosophical studies, which does get brought up in further details in another section. So It might be safe to assume the lead does give a briefly unusual description of the some of the information you hear about later on. The lead does not describe or list any of the subheadings. The article is slightly different considering it's on information for a word, so most of the information in the lead was not repeated, except for one word/concept that gets brought up.

Content: The article also contains a the same article attached as a hyperlink throughout the paper, and takes you to a page that goes into more detail of the word Hypsos and Sublime, along with referencing century importance and critiques of the word. The article contains a lot more information on the words, including misleading translations of the word, and the secrets/information about the unknown author who first used and referred to the word Hypsos/Sublime. If the story was going to be longer, which it should, it would need a lot more information on the topic. Considering one of its hyperlinks has an extensively long article on just the word sublime. With how the paper is currently written, I think the line, "Longinus’ theories and concepts differed greatly from other Greek rhetoricians and philosophers, and challenged the traditional rigid structure of rhetorical practices." needs to be removed because adds on more information to this Longinus character, and takes away from the purpose of the article. The article explains the "collection of volumes of Longinus’ essays" and says how Longinus refers to the word but doesn't explain how the word is used/expressed in the other volumes. It does not explain if the word, in a rhetoric sense, is expressed verbally, or by movement, or shown through facial expressions and/or ob body language. It should add the add more details on the use of the word in the visual arts, Architecture, and theTheatre. It should also talk about if the word is used/perceived/practiced differently in other centuries and/or parts of the world.

Tone and Balance: The overall tone of the article is serious and informative. For the most part, the article is speaks in a neutral tone, with only one phrase seeming a little biased. There were 2 lines that seemed hard to interpret as fact or opinion, so I clicked on the source, and noticed the link had a very opinionated tone. There is no real persuasion going on, it is just informative. The article does not seem to have any view points that are over or underrepresented, although the article does makes a statement that says Longinus’ theories are vastly different from other Greek rhetoricians and philosophers and seen as challenging the traditional rhetorical structure. There are no minorities or fringe viewpoints being described.

Sources and References: All the sources are derived from books and one website, that contains the years 2012, 2004, and 1867. They all seemed reliable, many were books and one came from the university of Michigan. I would not say that the authors had a very wide diversity range, but one author was Dutch, another Roman, and the last two sources were of the same book and author who was born in NYC with his mother being a french aristocrat. Only one source that had a link connected to it, to take you to the article, abstract page that had over 500 views. The others were links that you would have to copy. During my search for other sources, I found many journal articles located through JSTOR, but much were on the sublime or Longinus, and although hypsos is the linguistic root of sublime, and Longinus is this creator of hypsos, these articles can be relevant, but they would talk very little on specifically the term hypsos. Now hypsos can be used to describe many things so in a sense theres probably more articles you can look to for information. However, it seems to me that the way the wikipedia article is set up, it refers to sublime only once, and it was simply naming a written literary peace, which leads me to believe that any other additional information on Longinus and sublime would not be the point of the article. I also looked at some other websites I found that was specifically on hypsos, however, none were peer reviewed and were just random article websites. This all leads me to believe that there might not be other sources that specifically fit what this wikipedia page is trying to portray, and instead will take away from the main point and send you down a rabbit hole.

Organization and Writing Quality: The article is very well written and serious and to the point. I read through the article several times and noticed no grammatical or punctuational errors. The article has three major sections that are descriptive to what it contains.

Images and Media: The only picture attached to the article, is a rhetoric informational box. Despite that, there are no pictures that enhance the understanding of the article.

Talk Page Discussion: There are no conversations on the talk page except for the article. The only message is the wikiproject information box. We have never talked about this word in class, but when we go over terms it is only with a definition and relevance to our readings. The article added more importance to the word regarding its historical relevance and importance to our history of language and philosophers. It opens our minds up to see a word as having a real impact and importance to our language and visual/performing arts.

Overall Impressions: The status seems good but also seems like it has not been seen or edited by many people. All of the references are from a different books regarding Longinus, so the reach of information and sources the article is getting its descriptions from, are very limited. I think this leads to the strength of the article to be a little weaker. I think the article could be improved by adding into the article information on how hypsos can be expressed/used/perceived in the physical and or emotional sense, within different contexts, such as how it is shown through the visual arts, architecture, and theater. I also think it should reach out to different sources, or find some other context to the world that does not involve Longinus. If the word does not have any other connections, I think the article should state that. Regarding everything I have stated, I feel these are all clear reasons and examples as to why I would perceive this article as being incomplete