User:Kmathews1009/Choose an Article

Article Evaluation
The introductory sentence indicates that the text is the author's debut novel, yet overall the lead section tends to focus more on the book's shortcomings and undersells the book's importance. The lead section does not overview the article's interest in school curricula, traditions, & film and theatrical adaptations. From my position as a reader, the article overly details the plot summary and descriptions of main characters. The section titled 'Traditions' is largely underdeveloped and the content of the section seems disconnected to its title. The tone of the article is neutral. Where sources are utilized, they are done so to present balanced point(s) of view. However, there are no sources listed for the largest sections of the article: Plot Summary and Main Characters. Additionally, the sources used are not from reputable sources (peer-reviewed scholarly journals), rather, many are from entertainment websites. The writing quality is acceptable (no major errors that make the text unreadable.) There is one image—the book cover—so the article could benefit from additional images. On the talk page, it seems evident that other Wikipedia editors notice the same issues of content that I have pointed out; that is, the article is too robust in its description of plot and characters and ought to focus more on the importance of the novel/its literary and cultural influence. My overall impression of the article is that it is deservedly in the "start" category; it requires significant content improvements and incorporation of neutral, trusted sources. With that being said, there are two areas of revision I would like to focus on: 1) an overview of some of the existing scholarship on the feminist significance of the novel, and 2) a thorough description of the novel's controversy in school curricula.

Sources I Would Like to Include/Use in Edits

 * George, Tesia, V M Berlin Grace, and D. D. Wilson. "Feministic Analysis of the House of the Spirits." Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, vol. 12, no. 2, 2021, pp. 1204-1207.
 * Jenkins, Ruth Y. "Authorizing Female Voice and Experience: Ghosts and Spirits in Kingston's the Woman Warrior and Allende's the House of the Spirits." Melus, vol. 19, no. 3, 1994, pp. 61-73.
 * Smith, Kathryn M. "Telling (T)He(i)r Story: The Rise of Female Narration and Women's History in Isabel Allende's the House of the Spirits." Florida Atlantic Comparative Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, 2008, pp. 79-92.
 * Foerstel, Herbert N.. Banned in the U.S.A. : A Reference Guide to Book Censorship in Schools and Public Libraries, Greenwood Publishing Group, Incorporated, 2002. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/umaine/detail.action?docID=3000898.



Article Evaluation
The introductory section details the definitions of censorship and banning, spending time differentiating the two and describing their relationship to one another. It seems that this information is superfluous, and could be better placed within a distinct section of the article. In addition, the lead section mentions various organizations involved in the process of/tracking of book censorship, information that could be moved to the section of 'School boards' or 'Organization opposing book censorship.' The content of the article seems well balanced, especially in its coverage of rationales for book censorship. Two topics in particular, however, seem underdeveloped. First, the topic 'Social' is used to cover a range of issues, including race and sexual orientation. To me, this issues deserve separate discursive spaces and a more candid description of the section. Second, the topic 'Parenting' includes a quote by John Green—in which he discusses the strategy used by censors to ignore the context and focus only on particular content—but provides minimal elaboration to extend this to the broader topic of parenting. The books chosen as examples of book censorship are: Brave New World, To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, The Catcher in the Rye, the Harry Potter Series, and Fun Home. In terms of authorship, there is adequate representation of women writers, minimal representation of LGBTQ+ writer(s), but not one of these novels is written by a person of color. In the section 'Voices of banned authors,' both excerpts are from white male authors. This content decision ultimately affects the balance of the article, in that it refrains from discussing some of the political views associated with book censorship and the cultural aims to silence minoritized voices. The House of Spirits by Isabel Allende is not featured in the list section of banned/censored titles. The references for the article are appropriate, seem non-biased and from reputable sources, and are plentiful. The overall writing quality is strong, yet the organization is disjointed for reasons discussed above, as well as the decision to include 'Organizations opposing book censorship' and 'Banned Books Week' as subheadings under 'Reasons for censorship,' yet to include 'Voices of banned authors' as its own section. The page does not have any images/media; it may be useful to provide visuals to accompany banned book descriptions, either depicting book covers or showcasing diverse authors. On the talk page discussion, there is discussion that echoes my initial thoughts about the article, yet this discussion is focused more on clarity of content and purpose of article, rather than the social justice aspect of including marginalized voices. The page has been the focus for some student Wiki users involved in academic courses. My overall impression of the article is that it lacks representation and a focus. To put it another way, I would like to make edits to include more diverse authors, to more directly address potentially racist/sexist reasons for book censorship, and to assist in organizing the article to make the content more accessible and reader friendly.

Sources I Would Like to Include/Use in Edits


 * Foerstel, Herbert N.. Banned in the U.S.A. : A Reference Guide to Book Censorship in Schools and Public Libraries, Greenwood Publishing Group, Incorporated, 2002. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/umaine/detail.action?docID=3000898.

Article Evaluation
The lead section of the article adequately previews the article's content without becoming too specific. The overall content of the article is relatively up-to-date; to be sure, as I continue to research culturally responsive teaching, it will become easier for me to identify the particular questions of whether the article is current on CRT scholarship. Throughout the majority of the article, the tone is neutral. However, the section 'Using technology to promote CRT' becomes biased as it lends itself to arguing the importance of technology usage in schools. It is possible this section might be improved by more explicit connection of information to scholar sources; in other words, if it is made more apparent which scholar argues which point, then the overall argumentativeness of that section of the WikiArticle will be reduced. The article includes a variety of reliable, peer-reviewed scholarship as references. The organization of the article is adequate, yet the section 'Historical Context' is troublesome because it references scholars whose work is still relevant to CRT. That is, what is the difference between the scholarly arguments presented in 'Historical Context,' and those that make up the proposed teaching strategies and technology interventions proposed in later sections? In other words, what information is determined 'historical' and only contextual, and what information is determined 'current,' and does this distinction need to be made in this article? Further, the discussion on cooperative learning should further the suggestion that teachers "display a large visual of all individuals that are involved in a school (teachers, nurse, school counselors, janitors, children, bus drivers, vice principals, etc.) and a caption that encompasses the saying, "The Beauty of All People" (Wardle, 1992)" to include the terminology utilized by Gay to describe visual aids: "symbolic curriculum" (Gay, 2002). As of now, the article does not contain any images/media. The talk page discussion is limited; surprisingly, the article is ranked low-importance. My overall impression of the article is that it is a substantial overview of culturally relevant teaching, yet needs minor improvement to justify its inclusion of 'Historical Context' as its own section, a more neutral tone when discussing the technological literacy of students in tandem with CRT, and an enhancement in the discussion of symbolic curriculum.