User:Lindsaymr/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Olowe of Ise

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because we've gotten in class and in person time with this artist's work.

Evaluate the article
When looking at the Olowe of Ise's page on Wikipedia, it's pretty barren. From what I remember from the "Three Works by Olowe of Ise" homework article, it's accurate. The only thing I don't recall learning is the claim that he invented the art style called "oju-ona". When I went to look at some of the external links and references, I noticed that the 3 of the links don't work, one is so sketchy I was worried I'd get a virus, and only 2 are from reputable sources and actually work. This article only inserted only one photo of Olowe's work (the door at the British Museum), had no visual map guides and didn't mention the exchange that happened for the palace door or the DIA's door and throne. The grammar and layout of the article is fine but I'd give it a D because the "International Fame" tab only has two sentences, the links don't work and the effort that went into it is pathetic. I wish the article writer had discussed all of the symbolism/political climate behind the door such as the kings being on equal eye level as a middle finger to Britain and the individuality that went into Olowe's carvings and pieces for different patrons. A mention of the movement and representation of power dynamics in his pieces would've also been great to see. The single photo used in the article does adhere to Wikipedia's guidelines and the composition of the word to picture placement is well done, but again there's only one and that's disappointing. I would've liked to see more photos of his work like the throne, the other door from the DIA, and the handsome picture of him. I think it could be improved greatly by even just using that one extra source article and maybe doing a comparison between the two doors, the throne and the common themes that follow all of his work. The references used for this site are from reputable sources and there's more of them than you would've expected for such a short page of writing. I don't think enough effort was put into making the page because if you go to the sources there's even mention of more pieces such as one of Olowe's Veranda posts. The editor didn't touch on this, but surely must've read about. They mention that his work could be found as veranda posts but decided not to show a visual or expand on what one looks like at least. This page was poorly developed and the sources are there but the effort and care is not which bugs me even more. If you did the research you might as well talk about it? Did they just skim their sources or did they not see it as important?