User:KhaleesiArya/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Buffy Studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Buffy Studies was a class offered at my undergraduate school that I did not have the opportunity to take. The series has always been lauded for it's feminist viewpoints, but given the media climate surrounding series creator Joss Whedon, it is important to look at the topic from a new perspective and add information for context and content.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this article did not do an adequate job in discussing the subject. The introductory sentence includes erroneous information and the lead section itself does not mention the premise of the series that the academic subject is based on. The lead is concise and relies heavily on the use of a quote to get it's point across.

The content of the article also relies very heavily on the use of quotes to explain the topic. There are very few original thoughts within the article. It is primarily stitched together through references, summaries, and quotations. Rather than discussing and developing the themes of the subject, the characters, key figures in the industry, examples from the show, etc., it is a copy and paste of book summaries. The article was last edited a month ago, yet much of the content is outdated and largely irrelevant.

It is difficult to establish a tone for the article since it is a composite of various authors stitched together through conjunctions.

The sources are legitimate and well cited, and the links work. They are used to the point where there is no real article. There are more sources that could be used to flesh out a more well rounded view of the subject. There is no mention of current events within the subject. Although controversy may have erased this academic subject from relevancy, that should be reflected in the content of the article.

The sole image on the page is unfamiliar to fans of the topic. Rather than a logo or reference to the show, it is the small, unfamiliar logo of a journal that studies the topic. There is no explanation regarding it, nor is there any other image to reference the subject of the studies.

The talk page has no discernable discussion from the past 5 years. It is a C-class rated article within the scope of WikiProject Television. The article had been nominated for deletion in August of 2006, but it was voted to be kept.

The overall article was poorly structured. The strength lies in the concept. There is a lot of relevant content, it just needs to be updated and reorganized. Overall it is a poorly developed article.