User:Markerman76/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.

Evaluation 1 - Georgia Historic Markers


 * Georgia Historical Commission
 * I want to write an original article about Georgia Historic Markers and the Georgia Historical Commission is one of the first organizations responsible for the erection of these markers.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * A: Yes. The first few sentences clearly state who created the GHC, for what purpose they were created, when they were created, and what work they have achieved+ since being formed.
 * Q: Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * A: Not clearly, they are are indirectly described. The lead mentions, in paragraph style, the commission, the Georgia Legislature, the fact the the commission only existed fora brief time, and the work of erecting historic markers for history preservation purposes. In the paragraphs to follow, the founding commission members are mentioned, a Georgia Secretary of State is mentioned, the dissolution of the organization is mentioned, and the number of markers and one type/theme of marker is mentioned. However, the article does not have segregated sections with section headers. Therefore, the lead does not include a Table of Contents style description of any sections. Everything is in one continuous body style flow with only segregated paragraphs.
 * Q: Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * A: All information discussed in the lead is elaborated on in the article. However, info on the major project of erecting Historic Markers is sorely lacking in it's content coverage.
 * Q: Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * A: The lead is very concise.

Lead evaluation
The lead itself is very concise and all encompassing. However, it could use a Table of Contents which would lead to sectioning and heading the content body.

Content

 * Guiding question


 * Q: Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * A: Yes. My topic is Georgia Historic Markers and the content discusses the pioneering organization behind marker erection, the Georgia Historic Commission.
 * Q: Is the content up-to-date?
 * A: In regards to the Georgia Historic Commission, yes. This commission has been dissolved and the departments and societies that have since taken over it's work are mentioned.
 * In regards to the work and efforts since the take over, no. The Georgia Historical Society has spearheaded digitally based projects to further promote Georgia history through historic marker awareness, finding/locating, and information.
 * Q: Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes. The article mentions that a legislative act created the commission and that the same act originally forbade funding for the commission. There is no mention of the act's official title and no mention of how much funding was needed or given. There is no mention of the cost of erecting a marker or the cost of historic site acquisition and preservation. All the content that is there belongs, but there is definitely content missing.

Content evaluation
The content provided is concise and insightful, however, it's concision naturally leaves the information brief and limited and leaves the reader wanting to know more. The content is a good starting point and descriptor to the origins of Georgia Historic Markers and Georgia History preservation, but it is missing a "sequel". If the commission is no longer around, then another section or article should be created to detail the new Historical organization that has taken up the history preservation and promotion mantle.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Is the article neutral? Not entirely. It leans heavily in a favorable direction towards it's subject organization. It uses subjective adjectives to describe and assess the GHC's accomplishments.
 * Q: Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * A: Yes. One particular line states facts about President Carter dissolving the commission, but then is followed by this statement, "The successful agency's dissolution has caused controversy and bitterness." There is no supporting documentation or cited reference to that claim.
 * Q: Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Yes. The local perspective is underrepresented. The title of the article is "Georgia Historic Commission" so it's fitting that the main perspective should be from a state level and from a founders level, however it hints at "local historical societies" and "local groups". Other than this generic mention, the identities of these groups and the extent of their collaborative efforts is not fully expounded upon. There are 159 counties in the state and each one plays it's part in the erecting of markers and the preservation of state history. Not all 159 have to be mentioned, but a more micro breakdown of what this effort took to be achieved would be appropriate.
 * Q: Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * A:Yes. It persuades the reader in the favor of the Georgia Historical Commission and their efforts. It does swing the reader's interest toward Georgia History, but the "history" most focused on in this article is that of the commission and not so much of the state. In an article titled "Georgia Historical Commission" that is to be expected and given that they are no longer around, they themselves have become, well, history.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone is primarily a positive one in respect to the Georgia Historic Commission. The balance is heavy on the founding commissioners and legislative efforts that started the commission. The balance is moderately light on the actual history side and that of local groups that collaborated to help with this initiative.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * A: This Wikipedia article is heavily backed and basically copied from its' first external link, the New Georgia Encyclopedia.
 * Q: Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * A: The sources are thorough and they do reflect the available literature.
 * Q:Are the sources current?
 * A: The New Georgia Encyclopedia is not, it was last updated in 04/26/2013. The Georgia Historical Society's info is current.
 * Q: Check a few links. Do they work?
 * A: They, work. However, the Georgia Historical Quarterly link redirects to the Georgia Historical Society Wikipedia page. The GHQ is a publication distributed by the society to it's members.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources and references are very solid. However, I have a question about the copying of the New Georgia Encyclopedia page to create the Wikipedia page. Is this consider free-use information? Does this avoid copy-right infringement/plagiarism.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * A: Yes, however it could use a Table of Contents and Section Headers.
 * Q: Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * A: Not that I could find.
 * Q: Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * A: No. The sentence flow, - i.e. cohesion and coherence are solid, but there are no titled "Sections" or "Chapters".

Organization evaluation
The articles organization is good, but not great.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * A: Yes, but there are only two. This article is image famished.
 * Q: Are images well-captioned?
 * A: Yes.
 * Q: Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * A: Yes. They are on the commons page.
 * Q: Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * A: The layout is fine, but the quantity of images don't match the quantity of information. They don't include a full picture of a Historic marker, historic site, or founding member.

Images and media evaluation
Image and media quality are average and the image quantity is below average.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * A: There isn't much discussion on the talk page other than the typical ratings, however, links to the WikiProject page and the Georgia Historical Society page provide the needed narratives on this topic's status.
 * Q: How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * A: It's rated Start Class quality and Mid-Importance. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state).
 * Q: How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * A: It doesn't differ. The scales and the WikiProject link are there, just like we have learned about.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is adequate and functional. It provides appropriate info and links.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * What is the article's overall status?


 * Q: What are the article's strengths?
 * A: Origins of this commission and basic info.
 * Q: How can the article be improved?
 * A: It needs to be better segued over to the Georgia Historical Society. More media, financial and legislative info could be added.
 * Q: How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * A: It is 85% complete and slightly underdeveloped.

Overall evaluation
It is a good, but not great article. I agree with Wikipedia's rating of "Start Class" quality. This article needs additions and a few renovations.

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:

Evaluation 2 - Butler Brown Georgia Painter (Realist/Landscape Impressionist) White House Artist


 * Butler Brown Paintings in the White House
 * I want to write an original article about realist painter and Georgian, Butler Brown.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * A: Yes. The Teaser/Story Synopsis Line Sums Up the Article.
 * Q: Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * A: Yes. It mentions the titular subject, his career, and why he is worth noting.
 * Q: Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * A: No.
 * Q: Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * A: The lead is very concise.

Lead evaluation
The lead itself is a synopsis of the article.

Content

 * Guiding question


 * Q: Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * A: Yes. The mentions Mr. Brown and notes the height of his artistic efforts.
 * Q: Is the content up-to-date?
 * A: No. This article has now become a annual of sorts. It highlights Mr. Brown at the peak of his artistic career.
 * Q: Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No. This article is very detailed and biographed. The story of Butler sketching out drawings on cards at work is very insightful.

Content evaluation
The content provided is candid and the story has full development. From Mr. Brown sketching on punch-cards at work on Robins AFB to people "barraging" his house to buy portraits because President Jimmy Carter is a collector, the story contrast Mr. Brown's meteoric rise as an artist against his humble beginnings.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Is the article neutral? No. It leans heavily in favor Mr. Brown and his paintings.
 * Q: Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * A: Although the article mentions President Jimmy Carter and his wife, the article on leans in position of art taste and culture.
 * Q: Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Yes. The style of painting and it's cultural importance is mildly underrepresented. There is one sentence that talks about Mr. Brown's earliest memories. Memories that include his father weighing cotton and a tornado overturned pecan tree. Only this line alludes to Brown's painting style, Georgian, southern, realist, agricultural, landscape impressionist.
 * Q: Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * A: Not directly. However, one may want to go to a Butler Brown art gallery afterwards.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone is a featured one. Brown and his artistic endeavors are highlighted. It has opportunistic tones of fortune and fame.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * A: Yes. They are combated by other articles and publications such as the New York Times.
 * Q: Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * A: Yes. The article itself is a source.
 * Q:Are the sources current?
 * A: This article was current to it's time.
 * Q: Check a few links. Do they work?
 * A: N/A.

Sources and references evaluation
The article chosen is a source itself.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * A: Yes, it is very well written and developed.
 * Q: Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * A: Not that I could find.
 * Q: Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * A: N/A. This is a magazine article.

Organization evaluation
The article's flow is good.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Q: Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * A: No.
 * Q: Are images well-captioned?
 * A: N/A.
 * Q: Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * A: N/A.
 * Q: Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * A: N/A.

Images and media evaluation
N/A.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


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

Talk page evaluation
N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * What is the article's overall status?


 * Q: What are the article's strengths?
 * A: It's vivid account of the life and begininggs of the subject.
 * Q: How can the article be improved?
 * A: No improvement needed for it's publication. For a Wikipedia article, images could be added and a study/analysis of the art itself could be added.
 * Q: How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * A: In Wikipedia terms it is 50% developed.

Overall evaluation
This People article is a great catalyst for a Wikipedia on artist Butler Brown and the cultural importance of his art to Middle Georgia and the state as a whole.

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: