User:Mtlevine/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: Commedia dell'arte
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose this article to understand what a broad overview on the topic would look like, as this would most likely be the article used to gather general information about the performance style. Additionally, as a student of the style, I thought this article could fill in gaps about the art that I have not yet learned in class.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


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

Yes, it describes the "what," "when," and "where" of the topic.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

The introduction touches upon the first half of the sections, but it doesn't seem to clearly address the other sections.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

No


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

It's concise. I develop a broad understanding of the subject and what the article will talk about (in terms of the sections it does include).

Lead evaluation
Overall, I thought it was brief enough to introduce the topic clearly, yet it provided enough detail so that I would be interested in reading more to deepen my understanding.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

Yes, the content describes different aspects of the theatre form.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

The references date back to a wide range of years, but since this is an old art form, that makes sense and I do not feel like the age of the references affects the quality of the article.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

No. All of the included content deepens an understanding of the topic, and I don't feel like I am still wondering anything by the end of the article.

Content evaluation
I feel like the content is well-rounded as it describes the different elements of the theatre form. As I bring an actor's perspective to the read of the article, I felt like the piece touched upon the different components of performing that I would be directly affected by as an actor.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?

Yes, I didn't feel swayed towards a certain viewpoint.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

I don't consider this as a viewpoint, but the history of the style is the longest section, but I can understand this since because of the historical origin and significance of the style.


 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

No

Tone and balance evaluation
The article was definitely neutral, but it felt like a lot of the text was devoted to the history of the subject.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

The majority of the information is clearly cited, but a couple of the paragraphs have no citations within them. I wonder if this is because the citation for that paragraph comes in the following paragraph, as I know that is a legal citation rule. However, Just to be safe, the author(s) maybe should have cited those paragraphs anyway.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

Due to the wide range of source years, I think so.


 * Are the sources current?

They are mostly older (as in from more than ten years ago), but one is from the last few years.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Yes. Even Matt is cited!

Sources and references evaluation
The sources appear to be legitimate and relevant, and their old age doesn't seem to affect any aspect of the text.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

The article was all of the above. The only confusing parts were when a lot of Italian was used (as I didn't know what it meant so it disrupted the flow of the article) or when a lot of people related to the performance style were mentioned as I don't know who they are.


 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

No


 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

It is well-organized with clear sections that don't overload with detail to the point where I get so confused that the subject is incomprehensible.

Organization evaluation
The ideas of the article are clear, specifically due to its organization, but some of the more specific terminology goes over my head as I am a reader with little background knowledge on the topic.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

Yes, they provide as visual aid as to what the performance looked like.


 * Are images well-captioned?

Yes, they show the pictures' connections to the information discussed.


 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

Yes, especially as they are cited.


 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Yes, as they are scattered throughout the piece and aren't distracting.

Images and media evaluation
The media is intentionally used to act as a type of elaboration of the text that discusses the information.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

Many of the posts almost seem aggressive as the authors strongly care to see accurate and intentional information used.


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

It's rated as a "level-4 vital article" and is a part of three related WikiProjects.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

The information doesn't differ, as everything I have learned is related to the topic, but the article provides a deeper look into the topic. It provides this deep understanding because the contributors seem to really care about an accurate presentation of the information.

Talk page evaluation
Because the authors appear to be well-versed in the topic, which has resulted in thorough information, I would definitely need to inform myself more on the topic before I contribute to the article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?

The article succeeds in providing a broad but informational description of this style of theatre. It definitely informs someone who has no knowledge on the topic.


 * What are the article's strengths?

The article demonstrates a well-rounded view of the subject due to its multiple sections that describe unique aspects of the art.


 * How can the article be improved?

It might be interesting to see more contemporary information on the subject to understand why people still care about it and its connection to theatre today.


 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

I feel like the article is complete as I finished reading it feeling more knowledgeable on the subject and without any questions.

Overall evaluation
This is a strong overview article, but it might be more interesting and have a wider impact if it makes more connections to the theatre of the present.

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: