User:Nathanmarchant/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: Anti-Catholicism
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose this article because it is centered around a religious topic, and thought it would be an interesting way to understand how authors make their writing as neutral as possible.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * Yes the article has an introduction, a brief description of section, and it seems all the information is relevant. The article is very detailed, but in an objective way.


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

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * All the content seems relevant and up to date as there are examples of Anti-Catholicism as soon as 2020. No content appears to be missing to my knowledge. Everything seems to follow a logical progression and content is in the appropriate category. Yes, the article's central point is about oppressed populations, like the Catholics.


 * 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
 * The article is neutral, and all statement take a very objective perspective to the oppression and state what happened and the implications of it. Obviously the focus is on catholics, so religious oppression for other major religions isn't a heavy focus. The article isn't persuasive, except in trying to convince readers about historical events and how it affected Catholics.


 * 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
 * Not all facts have direct citations, but are backed up by evidence. From the several sources I looked at they seem to reflect the source well. Some sources are current, some are older. The sources appear to be from a variety of authors. The links are functional.


 * 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
 * The article is concise as it can be considering the lengthy history, and easy to read. There are no grammatical or spelling errors, and it is well organized.


 * 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
 * The images help to aid from the massive walls of text, and these images are captioned. The images follow the copyright regulations and are visually appealing.


 * 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

There have been several concerns about missing content from the article, and it is part of some low and mid tier WikiProjects. I noticed one interested feature is multiple citations per sentence where you combine many sources and statistics to make a condensed statement.


 * 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

The article seems very complete and is thorough. Citations and explanation are extensive. The introduction is well done and gives a good grasp of the topic as a whole. I don't have any suggestions.


 * 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: