User:Liamahearn/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: (link) American Dream
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I am writing my 2nd Essay on this topic and even though Wiki is not the most credible source, there are links and background information I can use.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead is very interesting, it has an introductory sentence that I never really thought the American Dream was but it makes a ton of sense. Besides the content tab there is not a description of the major sections in the article. Everything in the Lead in was explained int depth in mainly the History Tab of the article. It is a little muddled down by a quote which is relevant but not overly important in figuring out what the American Dream means or where it stems from.

Content

 * Guiding questions


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

Content evaluation
Most of the information is relevant. It goes into depth about generations and the adaptations of the American Dream and many respected individuals ideal on t eh american dream and what it means to them. I think that the part when it talks about the Chinese Dream and other countries is pretty irrelevant and is not something that adds any value to the american dream. I feel that they could add a 21st Century piece to the American Dream which talks about what it has been like in the past 20 years and if it has gotten better or worse.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is pretty neutral with mainly facts and no opinions. The claims are straightforward and pretty obvious there is a definition in the Public Opinion first line which appeared to be the only obvious opinion by defining it as "hard work." I do not think that there is any dispute about the validity of the American Dream just the degree at which it is viewed.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


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

Sources and references evaluation
This is the best aspect of the article. They have 70+ sources and the links work and are monitored to insure they continue to work. A few of the sources have a lot of potential to better the article. There is one about the future of the American Dream which was super interesting to look at but there was little to no mention about it in the article. Se osme are very outdated but they use them in the background and past sections of the article.

Organization

 * Guiding question


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is well written but very complex and hard to read at times, it has a lot of statistics and philosophical ideas which have proved to be harder to conceptualize. It is organized very well and the sections are well titled and explained. I wish it went more in depth in the political section but I am glad it was there in the first place. A 21st Century section would be useful in my opinion.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
Again the Images are underwhelming. There are three of them and one is a very small graph which is too hard to read. I think that it is hard to find images of a concept but the ones that they chose are terrible. There are sections without images and there is a picture of Shanghai in 2019 and that is the caption, which is very confusing. I think the captions are terrible some are too long and some are too short. Very bad images, the bar is low because of the conceptualization of the topic but it could be much better.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is very sparse. It is rated a C which is mainly due to the lack of importance that Wiki has given it. The talk page has a few notes about some excessive detail and broken links but for the most part it is very empty. The information is not disputed in this talk page and it is a little weird that many people are not talking on the talk page.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
I think that this article is very underwhelming but I think that it is very difficult to write about in this way because it is subjective and there is a lot of talk about it and it has changed over time. I think overall it is about the wrong thing. It tries to give people a overview about the history of the American Dream and gives off the idea that it is the same for everyone and that it has stayed the same overtime. Which is not what I think. The central idea has changed as our society has but it is not the same for anyone people value things differently. And it means different things to a 5 generation White Man and a Immigrant Syrian, which is not touched on as much as I feel it should be.