User:Nava0914/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article: The Lord of The Flies
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
-Yes the lead sentence of this wikipedia article describes what the article will be about which is the novel "The Lord of The Flies." The lead includes a background piece about the author and a note about some of the major themes in the book.

- Yes the lead is really a brief descriptions of the articles major sections, although not explicitly stated as an overview upon comparing the articles one sees that it subtly references the different sections in the article.

- No none of the information found in the lead is found in the article.

-Yes the lead is concise and therefore not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
-Yes The content is all about the novel and its reception, themes and background, which is the topic of the article.

-Yes relatively, it has refrences from articles that were written in 2018 and since the novel was written in 1954 they were able to include relevant details about the book.

-No all of the content is relevant to the book. Maybe it could include more contemporary opinion, but I'm not sure if that's allowed due to wikipedias nature.

-No it is just an article about a book.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
- Yes although they do include references to the novel being on lists of the greatest books of the last century.

- Yes there is a claim that is a unique interpretation that is stated as fact.

-No most viewpoints on the book are neutral although the article praises the novel for its popularity and success.

- Yes it tries to convince the reader of the novel being a counterpoint to Tthe Coral Island" but does not report the author saying so. Instead it includes a link to an article.

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?

Sources and references evaluation
-Yes all sources are secondary, reliable, and at least well known.

-Yes they are thorough although they could use more scientific papers, most of it comes from news articles.

-Yes the sources are as recent as June 2020

-The sources come from many different news prints, that represent different perspectives. For example, Indiewire and the Times have different bases. But there is a missing presence of marginalized perspectives.

-After clicking a few links they all worked.

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?

Organization evaluation
- Yes it is concise, clear and easy to read.

- No, there are no major grammatical errors or any spelling mistakes.

- Yes the article is broken into different points and the text below those categories reflect the point that it states.

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?

Images and media evaluation
- Yes it includes a picture of the original cover page of the "Lord of the Flies" novel.

-Yes it tells us what it is.

-Yes it has sources, artists, authors and links all underneath the caption.

-Yes it is at the top of the page and looks very nice on the right hand side.

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?

Talk page evaluation
-The conversations are mostly about adding things to the article. This includes adding similarities to ww2 and the cold war, as well as a music reference in the song " Cane Hill's "Lord of Flies" song, which is on their 2018 album 'Too Far Gone'" Talk:Lord of the Flies

-It is rated c-class. It is in three wiki projects. 1. Wikiprojects Novels. 2. Wikiprojects islands 3. Wikiprojects Children's Literature. And it is rated top-importance in wiki project 1 and 3

-On this topic page there's not a lot of discussion between Wikipedians rather there are a few points or tasks and a done or not done indicator under them.

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?

Overall evaluation
-It is an important article, but is rated poorly, and can probably use a lot of work from more Wikipedians.

- The articles strengths are that it is grammatically correct, it is concise and to the point.

- The article can be improved by providing more analysis interpretations, more scholarly papers, more pictures, and a reference to publication dates.

- It is poorly developed and could use more pictures and more categories that help readers understand more about the book like it's characters and symbolism.

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: