User:Lal579/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an Article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Harry Potter
 * I loved this series growing up and I have also seen censorship of this book first-hand, as someone I knew wasn't allowed to read it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I would consider it concise, especially compared to the massive volume of Harry Potter information contained in the paragraphs below.

Lead evaluation
I thought that the Lead was the perfect combination of brevity and specificity. The Lead was able to effectively cover all of the main topics below and with just enough information to keep the reader interested. The Lead also did a good job of only including the most important pieces of information and not wasting space on more irrelevant ones. However, it could possibly be improved by adding some of the "other developments" (second to last sentence of last paragraph) because they made that comment in reference to what was happening in 2016. It may be a good idea to update that line with more relevant developments as a lot others have happened in the last four years.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes (even includes impacts of COVID-19)
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes (kind of)

Content evaluation
I thought the content was very thorough, relevant, and up to date. It includes the new movies that have come out and even some new plays that have been released during the pandemic. In regards to missing content, I was shocked to see that the sale of wands and harry potter item replicas were not mentioned at all. There are companies today that have huge lists of Harry Potter character's wands and sell lots of them. With that being said, I think it would be important to include this market of Harry Potter replicas as it has done very well. Also, in the Origins sections, it mentions how J.K Rowling was advised by her publisher's to choose a more "gender neutral" name to release her books under; this line is referencing the the up hill battle that female writers had to fight against sexist stigmas.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
The article presented all of the information in a very objective way and was very inclusive of all controversies that the series faced (legal battles, religious controversies, etc.). As a whole, I feel like it encompassed all viewpoints (positive and negative) and presented them in a neutral, balanced light.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * There are current sources, yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
With 222 sources, this page does an excellent job sourcing every statistic, award, and development related to the Harry Potter series. I checked several of the links and found them to work just fine. Also, several links were from authors from various racial backgrounds. As a whole, the sources seemed to be very reliable, thorough, and diversified.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, I did not notice any
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Organization evaluation
The article was very well-written in terms of grammar and structure. It was easy to read and easy to follow. The sections were all clearly thoughtfully chosen and each added a lot the page as a whole.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No

Images and media evaluation
I would say that the images chosen did add to the understanding of topic as whole. However, I feel like they should be re-organized. For example, in the Voldemort Returns section, the images are all lined up on one side so it was not very visually appealing. Additionally, I feel like adding more images would add a lot to the reader experience. Harry Potter is a series that has the luxury of a wide selection of impressive visuals that could be included and should be included. Although the images added value and were well captioned, I feel like they could be organized more effectively and that they could have been part of a larger selection.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are discussions about whether to include the nationalities of authors and discussions about including more details about Harry's muggle family, the Dursley's.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Level 4 vital article (GA class) and it's semi-protected. Yes, in the United Kingdom, Children's Literature, and Women Writers projects just to name a few.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It does not focus nearly as much on the censorship of the series

Talk page evaluation
I feel like the Talk page is very well monitored and taken very seriously.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I think it could easily be considered a "model" Wikipedia page for all Wikipedians
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The effective organization and selection of information
 * How can the article be improved?
 * It could add more images and more thoughtfully place them on the page. Additionally, it could talk about the market for Harry Potter replicas.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Extremely well-developed

Overall evaluation
I found the article to be very well structured, balanced in terms of perspectives, and effective in terms of content. It is clearly well-monitored and highly valued among the Wikipedia community; the quality of article clearly reflects that. The only improvements that could be made are very minimal.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: