User:Lstockton/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: (Pente)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because this is a board game I grew up playing with my grandfather, and I figured I might as well learn a bit about its origins.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead starts with a concise overview of the topic: it tells you exactly what the article is about. However, I believe for the size of the article, it is too wordy. Instead of a brief description of its major sections, the article uses its Lead to discuss the origins of the topic, in this case Pente, which is something that should be saved for the history section following it. Overall, I think the construction of this Lead could be better fitting to an article that is not lengthy, such as itself.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

This article has two sections: History and Rules. The history section is lacking in substance because everything that should go there about the origins and beginnings of the game can be found in the Lead. The Rules section, however, is detailed as well as informative. In the article, it says distribution of the game stopped in 1993, and I know this to be false since I picked one up at my local shopping mall the other day. Also, I think the content of the article should be expanded to include other varieties on the rules of the game, such as points scoring, team play, and tournament play all receiving their own sub-section under the rules section.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

This article is written from a very neutral viewpoint that doesn't shift the readers thinking in any certain direction. The article discusses the origins, the rules, and touches briefly on the history of the game.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

A few of the links actually directed me to news articles written about the game, but none were current, and all were small local outlets. The one website it has cited is for an online multiplayer pente website. In the Lead itself, there is a section that is bracketed stating [citation needed], which needs revised right off the bat.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well written in the rules section. There it explains in good detail the objective, turns, and how to eventually win the game. The rest of the article lacks clarity in the sense that there just isn't enough material there. To make the Lead look more appealing, it seems that a contributor to the article wrote, or moved, part of the History section into the lead, making for a weak Lead, and a crippled History section.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article has one computer generated, public domain owned, picture depicting a sample game of pente between two opponents at the very top of the page, on the right side.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

It appears that in one of the most recent posts in the talk page there was another person who agreed with me about the articles lack of citation. They stated what was wrong with the article and if not fixed, what he would do; no surprise, he said he would delete it. As opposed to class, where everyone interacts in a semi-civil manner, the users on the talk page of the pente wikepedia article were petty and terse with their responses to one another. On the bright-side, while it is definitely less civil, it is also a lot less informal than I thought it would be, making it seem like I can actually participate in the discourse.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The overall status of the article is in the start-class, meaning that it is in need of some serious work. While the organization is poor, the rules are written in a way so that rules can be read, as well as observed, leading to a better understanding. I would assess this article as being severely underdeveloped. It is not poorly developed solely because of the rules section.


 * 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?

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: Talk:Pente