User:Marcoperez2024/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. Night (book) I chose this book because I have a background in it, giving the fact that I'd read it twice for school before.
 * Name of article: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead provides a concise, but descriptive sentence giving a very basic overview of the book as a whole including the author's name, what happens, when, and when it was published. The Lead provides more of a history of the writing and publishing of the book after giving a brief description of the book's content, which is also covered later on in the article. No Concise
 * 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 was very thorough but brief at the same time. It provided a brief overview of the article as a whole and summed up most general sections pretty well.

Content

 * Guiding questions

Yes Yes No One could make the argument that Jews were historically underrepresented (especially in Pre-War Europe); even today, Jews make up a very small percentage of the population in some countries compared to Christians, for example.
 * 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
The content of the article is pretty good. It gives an adequate overview and summary of the book as a whole, and I was reminded of some aspects I'd forgotten since I last read it. It seems to have been written by someone with at least some background in this area, as they cite Jewish and Holocaust scholars and provide some historical context of the War.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

Yes Not really No No
 * 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 seems to be very unbiased, giving mostly the facts on the book, its history, and its reception. It provides some criticisms of the book, like its historical accuracy, how it changed from translation to translation, etc. Nevertheless, overall, it was in terms of balance and tone.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Yes, there are several footnotes and references (67) Yes Yes Yes, considering Jewish people were often marginalized and persecuted; the entire book is about that experience. As I previously mentioned, several Yiddish and Jewish scholars were cited in the article Yes
 * 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
The article regularly references other works and writers. In fact, while most of the Wikipedia articles I've seen include only a "References" section, this one includes a "Works Cited" section as well, giving bibliographic citations in what appears to be the Harvard style for every source used.

Organization

 * Guiding questions

Yes No Yes
 * 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 organized in a very straight-forward and easy-to-follow manner. It provides a background to the events of the book, gives a synopsis of it, providing quotes from the text when deemed appropriate, and ends with the history of the publishing and reviews. All in all, it gives a wholistic view of Night.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

Yes Yes Yes Yes
 * 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
The images are spread out throughout the article to give the reader a visual interpretation of the content; these include maps, pictures of the author throughout his life, and of the actual camps where he was detained. There's at least one image in each section, and every image gives credit.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

They seem very civilized, despite the fact that there's only two. One is about a contributors intention to change all of the citations to the Harvard style, for which she is given much praise. The other (which hasn't been completed yet) requests changing the name of the "Synopsis" section to "Plot" in order to fit in with other literary Wikipedia articles; the debate is that Night isn't really considered a narrative, but a memoir, but it's a mix of fiction and nonfiction. It's rated pretty well; it's a Featured Article (FA) and it part of 3 WikiProjects: Jewish History, Books, and Novels. I don't see much of the discrimination that was brought up in other class meetings. This article was written by a dedicated person or group of people who respectfully address each other in the Talk page and it highly rated.
 * 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 was very interesting. Like I said there was civil and respectful discourse, with no signs of discrimination or negative attitudes for one another. The article is held in pretty high esteem and has very minimal debate in the Talk page.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

It's a very good and well-written article; like I mentioned before, it has the highest rank possible: FA. There are a lot of citations; one can find out exactly where it came from and it's even presented in a scholarly format. Bringing up where, when, and why it was censored or banned in certain parts of the world. The article doesn't mention that at all. It is definitely well-developed.
 * 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
It is a very good article; you can definitely tell that some people put a lot of time into this, even in the citations. The only criticisms I can give it is to add more information.

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 — ~

Talk:Night (book)
 * Link to feedback: