User:Miaonl/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.


 * Erie people: (Erie people)
 * I chose this article because I lived on the Erie people's old territory

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The article begins with a sentence that sums up the Erie people.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead describes the history of the Erie people but does not mention the language, which has its own subheading.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The article mentions parts of Erie culture and way of life that are not present in the rest of the article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is not too long, but perhaps is overly detailed. It could use less info in the lead and more in the subheadings.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article details the history of the Erie people and briefly describes their language.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content is up-to-date, as the history of the Erie people is all in the past.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The article could use some more information about the Erie culture, if any sources exist. The bulk of the article is focused on the history of war against the Iroquois. I wonder if the article could also detail history before the 1650s.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * The article provides information about an indigenous tribe that no longer officially exists, which relates to underrepresented populations/topics.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article is very neutral. Most of the language does not carry colonizer undertones. The article does at times feel like it perpetuates the "vanishing Indian" myth, although this subject is more complicated because the Erie tribe was completely destroyed. The article does also mention that survivors were absorbed into neighboring tribes. However, in the first sentence, the idea that the Erie people "were" in the past-tense feels too strong. Perhaps saying the Erie tribe instead of people would sound less "vanishing Indian."
 * The article also mentions that the Erie lived on what is now New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio instead of saying Erie territory. This plays into the colonizer ideas in the Merrell article of adopting state names far before they existed.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Almost every fact has a citation on it. However, a couple of instances do not have a citation immediately at the end of the sentence, although this may just be editor error.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The article's reference section lists 10 sources. I assume there is limited literature on the topic because the Erie tribe was broken up in the 1600's, however I do not know.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of the sources are fairly old, although two are from the 2000s. Again, I assume there are not many sources.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * There are six authors out of ten sources. While I could not find all of them from a Google search, the authors were not very diverse, only one being a woman. None were indigenous, as far as I know.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Every link I clicked worked (I clicked on most of the links to articles)

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it is a good read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No glaring errors. A scan through the article did not result in me finding any errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The organization can use some work. The introduction goes into history and culture. Then the next section goes through history. Finally, there is a section with one sentence on the language. I think the little information on culture could use its own section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article has two images, both maps. The first map helps show where the Erie people lived. The second map is an old map created by a Frenchman which is slightly confusing to read but does show a source from the time. The second map also problematically suggests that the indigenous peoples of America sparsely populated the land. It shows clusters of dots for settler communities, but not for Native nations. This is one of the problems suggested in the Merrell article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The captions are fine.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images are just on the right side of the page. Both are a little small, perhaps they can be enlarged slightly.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Most of the conversation is about whether the Erie Indian Moundbuilders Tribal Nation is real or not. There is also a section disputing the location of the Erie people.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated start-class by three WikiProjects: Pennsylvania, Erie, and Indigenous Peoples of North America.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The article mostly does not use colonizer language that we learned about in the Merrell article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is fairly complete and up-to-date.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article goes into the history of the Erie during the time of the war with Iroquois pretty strongly.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can develop more in the language section. It could also use some information about Erie culture and history prior to the war with the Iroquois.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I would say the article is complete, but underdeveloped. i think it is lacking information mostly because not much exists.

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:Erie people
 * Very bottom of the page