User:Mrh294/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: Fahrenheit 451
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article to evaluate because I found it interesting that it is not on the list of banned/challenged books. When I was in high school, this was one of the books my classmates and I were required to read.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic, it gave an overview of what the book is about and why (without directly stating it) the book may violate and be placed on the List of Banned and Challenged books. The article also mentions the successes of the book, not just why the book is considered "controversial." The Lead briefly states an overall overview of the book to give readers a general idea of what the book was about. Overall, I believe the lead is concise and does not add on too much extra information. The Lead introduces an adequate amount to a point where a reader will have the desire to continue reading. It is not too lengthy nor too bland.


 * 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?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article's content is relevant to the topic. It states an overview of the topic, and then has sub-topics that include the successes, the censorship of the book, themes, publications and much more. One specific detail that could have more information was why it was banned/censored from certain schools. Overall, each subtopic gives an adequate amount of information for a reader to gain a common knowledge about the book. For the most part, I believe that the article isn't really up to date. Basing it off the recent awards that it had received in 2018, I found their that the most recent awards were published for Fahrenheit 451 drawing to my personal conclusion that the article is, there is not much said about the book being that their was only one really recent award and the rest ranged from 1996-2009. Towards the end of the article, there is a section where different people used the plot of Fahrenheit 451 to build off and make different scenarios. For example, the article stated that there was a movie was made called Fahrenheit 9/11, which was based off of "the temperature in which freedom burns." After reading this article, I do not believe it really deals with Wikipedia's equity gaps. It is more focused on displaying the information rather than relating it to other topics. I definitely believe that this article needs more exposure to Wikipedia's equity gaps and to try and find ways where it can focus more on different populations and topics.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

After reading this article, I would definitely say it is


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

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: