User:MaoXiRong/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Link: Parody

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This topic is interesting to me and I have studied satire and parody in school.

Lead section
The lead section is well-developed and provides a good overview of the topic. It is a good quick read for users who are only looking for basic information about parody.

Content
All content seems to be up-to-date and related to parody; most of its content is about the definition of parody, the history of parody, and gives examples of it. The rest is about legal issues regarding parody. However, I think there needs to be a section that distinguishes parody from similar works (i.e., satire, burlesque, pastiche, etc.). The lead is a bit misleading in that it makes these terms synonymous with each other, when in fact, some of them are their own categories. Parody criticism by Jonathan Greenberg would be a good additional source to fill this gap.

Furthermore, I think there needs to be more contemporary examples of parody. The historical examples are very prominent throughout the article, but recent ones are comparatively scarce.

Tone and balance
Although the tone is overall unbiased, there is not much minority representation. Many of the sources and examples are by white men. While there are some mentions of Chinese, Japanese, and non-English parodies, this small group is not enough to be considered balanced representation.

Sources and references
Some facts need citations. Apart from that, the article is largely built on peer-reviewed academic articles that thoroughly cover the topic of parody. If there are references to “random sites,” they are typically backed up by the reliable sources. However, there still needs to be a more diverse set of authors.

Organization and writing quality
Although the sentences themselves are clear, professional, and do not have noticeable spelling or grammar mistakes, the article could be reorganized so that the transition between different information flows more smoothly. For example, the Music section could be moved further down so that the historical sections are seen first, which would make more sense to me.

Images and media
There are only three images. They all follow copyright regulations, and I am neutral about their placement.

Talk page discussion
There is not much discussion in the Talk page; I do not think I can comment on much of it.

The Parody page has been rated as a Start-Class and is of Top-importance to WikiProject Comedy.

Overall impressions
The article is noticeably incomplete and should have more information that distinguishes parody from similar modes/genres. Of course, parody is a slippery topic, so I understand why this page is slow to develop.

Feedback from Vetter
Hello - Great work on this article evaluation of parody. It's a geat article to work on for this assignment because of how it matches your research interests, as well as because of the obvious developmental needs it demonstrates. Your evaluation is really thorough. I especially appreciated how you noticed that the term parody could be "distinguished" from other similar concepts (such as satire). I think this would make a good addition to the article, and I also really appreciate your idea to include more diverse examples.

Both of these would be great starting places for your editorial work. I would also recommend a handbook of literary terms s a good source for general information/definition.

Just keep in mind that you don't need to take the article to any kind of "final version" - the assignment requirements are


 * Minimum of 4 references cited and added to Wikipedia article
 * Minimum of 300 words added to Wikipedia article

I'm excited to see what you will do with this article. Keep in mind that a draft of your edits is due on Oct. 4.

-DarthVetter (talk) 13:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)