User:Mksneha/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: Diana and Actaeon (Titian) (Diana and Actaeon (Titian))
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I enjoy the composition of this artwork and would like to improve the article beyond how the artwork travelled geographically and exchanged ownership.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the introductory sentence describes the artwork and its significance briefly.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * To a degree, yes, but only the current location of the painting is discussed, not its previous ownership.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes. The Lead includes info about the myth that inspired the painting and identifies several figures in the painting, neither of which is discussed further in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise but does not provide an accurate representation of what is in the article.

Lead evaluation
The Lead effectively introduces the painting, but the successive paragraphs fail to properly describe what is present in the article's major sections.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content is about who owned the painting and where it was displayed throughout history.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content is accurate as of the present day.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is no information about the painting's visual attributes or the background of the painting beyond its locations and owners.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No, the article does not deal with an equity gap.

Content evaluation
Though the content present is relevant and up-to-date, it is not sufficient to make the article a complete overview of the painting.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, there are no biased claims present.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There are few viewpoints present in the article, but none are over-/underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The articles does not attempt to persuade the reader.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article employs a neutral tone and unbiased perspective on the painting.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, the sources are both historically accurate (and substantiated) and provide relevant insight into external perspectives on the artwork.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are current to the information they provide.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * The sources come from reputable news sources and art critics, but historically marginalized individuals do not seem to be included where possible.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links work. Some sites are no longer available, but the relevant page is linked via web.archive.org.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources present are reputable and current, and all facts are substantiated by secondary sources.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is clear and concise, but it is not very easy to read due to lengthy paragraphs.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * The article has a few spelling/grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is well-organized for the content available.

Organization evaluation
The article is clear, concise, and well-organized, but the larger paragraphs should be broken down and there are a few spelling/grammatical errors to correct.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, as the topical artwork and other works from its series are present in the article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * No, there are very brief captions present, if at all.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, all images adhere to copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, but more images could be added to deepen the reader's perception of the painting.

Images and media evaluation
The images present are relevant to the topic and adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations, but more images could be added.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are two threads on the talk page, for the lack of description present and regarding updates to external links.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is part of three WikiProjects, where it is rated as follows: in WikiProject Visual arts, it is rated Start-class; in WikiProject Scotland, it is rated Start-class and in WikiProject Low-importance; and London, it is rated Start-class and Low-importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia addresses this topic in terms of information that is not present, as opposed to discussing its attributes and the significance of its relocalization.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is quite minimal, as only 2 independent feedback sections are present. The article is rated as start-class and of low-importance.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is generally incomplete, save for some background given regarding the painting's ownership.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article provides a concise Lead section and a well-substantiated section about how the painting has moved and changed ownership over time.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Additional sections discussing the painting's visual attributes, composition, and creation can be added.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is underdeveloped in the sense that it is missing pertinent sections, but the content present is well-developed.

Overall evaluation
The article requires additional sections in order to become complete, though its existing sections are well-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:Diana and Actaeon (Titian)