User:LRegan/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Bridge to Terabithia (novel)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I choose this article as my family frequently watched the movie "Bridge to Terabithia" growing up. Watching the movie, my first impression was that is was a heart-wrenching meaningful tale, which touches on important and controversial topics, such as death and religion.

(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Lead

 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The lead does not include a concise and clear introductory sentence. Instead, the lead includes an overview/summary of the novel and briefly addresses the subsections in a paragraph.
 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead includes brief descriptions of the major sections, including plot line, literary awards, censorship, and adaptations.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.) The lead includes Thomas Crowell as the publisher, which is not mentioned later in the article.
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think the lead is concise as it includes an overview of the plot line and the history and reception of the novel.

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? The article's content is relevant to the topic. The sections of the article are: Background, Plot Summary, Characters, Reception, Literary Significance, and Adaptations. These all contain information centered around the novel.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The content is up-to-date for the most part. The sources are outdated, which impacts the timeliness of the content.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think the article is missing information on meaning and relevance within the book. For instance, the article should contain how this book impacted children. Instead, it simply contains quotes from adults and literary professionals in which they praise the novel. I also think the article should include examples of conflicts surrounding this book; it states that "Bridge to Terabithia" has been on banned book lists, but does not give examples of schools or organizations that challenged it. Furthermore, the article should expand on the reception of the book in countries other than the United States.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? The article does not deal with or address equity gaps or historically underrepresented groups.

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? The article is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are no heavily biased claims.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The article is objective; there are no overrepresented or underrepresented viewpoints.
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? There are not many minority or fringe viewpoints in the article. The article briefly mentions religion in the context of the novel; this is objectively stated.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The article does not attempt to persuade the reader.

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? The majority of the facts are backed up by a reliable source. When referencing "The Chronicles of Prydain," however, there is no citation; instead the phrase "citation needed" is stated.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The article is missing sources from scholarly sources- such as teachers, literary experts, and librarians.
 * Are the sources current? The majority of the sources are from the 1990s and 2000s; the most recent source is from 2012.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The sources do not seem to be from historically marginalized communities or individuals.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? There are better sources available, including the following (which are all peer reviewed journal articles): https://www.jstor.org/stable/41404823, https://www.jstor.org/stable/45348317 , and https://www.jstor.org/stable/20205410.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links do work.

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? The article is well-written. It is straightforward and easy to follow.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The article is well organized.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No, the article only includes an image of the first edition book cover.
 * Are images well-captioned? The caption includes the necessary information, but would be better with more details.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? The image is visually appealing in its layout. More images throughout the article would improve the appeal, however.

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? The main conversations address the placement of this book on a banned book list. Editors discussed the reasons behind this, including the religious themes and death-centered plot. There is not much activity on the Talk page, with the majority of comments dating to 2011, 2008 and 2007.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated C- as a level-5 vital article. It is part of the following WikiProjects: Novels, Children's Literature, and Women writers.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The Talk page contains opinions from Wikipedians on the quality of the novel, and their personal views, which I did not anticipate. The Wikipedians also very briefly discuss topics and do not reference sources often.

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status? The article's overall status is level-5 vital article (C-).
 * What are the article's strengths? The article is well-organized with sufficient a background and plot summary.
 * How can the article be improved? The article can include more information on the controversy surrounding the book, along with the impact of the novel on children and in other countries. The article should also reference more scholarly sources.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article, in my opinion, is underdeveloped. Although well-organized, it is lacking in details and certain topics should be expanded on.