User:Lag16116/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Side-scrolling video game

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen this article because it is a topic of interest for me. In the digital media and design program I am focusing on video game design. When looking through the C-class articles I scrolled across video games and looked at the rating. The side scroller article had a rating of C-class but an importance of high. This states the article is important but on a lower quality implying there can be missing important content, containing irrelevant content, or having problems/needing cleanup.

My primary impression of the article is that it is a good example of how to word phrases and statements on topics. For the topic of side scrollers the wording was a description of the word, then a section details various uses. One thing that I noticed was that the categories of uses of side scrollers were also described. For example when discussing character action games the article made sure to state that it included beat-em-ups, run-and-guns, and scrolling platformers. The examples of games were also very important and recognizable games in the genre and mentions included a hyperlink to that games Wikipedia page. For example when mentioning Super Mario Bros there is a link to the page. Another key thing I noticed was that at the end of the page there were related pages linked such as 2.5D, flip-screen, parallax scrolling, scrolling, and vertical scrolling video games. For the talk page I saw discussions on making sure that the links are correct, on whether the article should be merged with the platform game page, if there is an example of a right to left sidescroller, image copyright with certain image, and external link changes.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of the article does a good job to define what a side scroller is by giving a definition of what the term is. It then states the prominent hardware the genre debuted on which was the Atari and NES. The article goes into the uses of side scrolling and this section has a template message stating that the section may not reflect the encyclopedia tone on Wikipedia. After looking at the guide to writing better articles and the suggestions a potential cause might be referring to games as popular as that can be an opinion.

For the content of the article it is all related to the side scroller topic as it goes into the definition, usages, history with the various types of side scrolling games, and then related articles. The games referenced are all prevalent and are very important games in the genre such as Contra for run-and-run, Mario for side scrollers, and Double Dragon for beat em ups. These all included links towards the games respective pages as well. The content is up to date as it is based on the history of the side scroller and when looking at the edit history the last revision was on January 20th. The article is not one of the Wikipedia equity gaps as it is not a very underrepresented topic.

As mentioned prior there is a template for the use of side scroller section stating the tone may not reflect the Wikipedia one. However when reading it is a neutral read on the subject and does not try to persuade anyone towards any sides. There are no views that are underrepresented or overrepresented. The only real tone that might not be within the encyclopedia is referring to games as popular as that can be opinionated, but it does not suggest that the popular game is good or bad, just mentions it as an example of a side scroller.

The sources of the article come from history document such as the Sega Arcade History published in 2002. Some of the pages while originally coming from reliable sources cannot be linked back to as the page could not be found. These links would need to be revised as they could not be accessed, but the ones that were accessible were through and included a variety of articles such as authors, documents, and books.

The article is well organized as each section is concise while informative and all the information is all relevant towards its subject. There are no grammar/spelling mistakes I noticed in my times reading it. The image in the article shows a side scroller game similar towards Mario and does a good job of representing what a side scroller game looks like. This image is open source when looking at the games page linked in the caption. The caption is informative and short as it describes what the game is and links the website of the game. The game is a part of WikiProjects Video games to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. It includes a project page where there is discussion on the games that are being edited and created. The side scrolling article has a C rating and a high importance.

The talk page shows a lot of the topics discussed in the learning Wikipedia modules as it covers having correct links, copyright issues with images, questions, and discussing whether content should be on this page or another page.

Overall the article is good but could use some improvements. The strengths is the concise and descriptive nature of the article as it covers the content in a quick and descriptive manner. The main weakness is the links that could not be accessed as there were a couple. These could be improved in order to allow users to find the original information. For the links that worked they were informative therefore it is only a few that can be improved. I think this is a well developed article.

Lag16116 (talk) 04:38, 22 January 2022 (UTC)