User:Nlau1225/be bold

Being bold is important on Wikipedia. Article Evaluation

1.     Does the article lead (aka lede) provide a clear overview of the main article content?

Yes, it overviews the production timeline, the collaborations that made it very popular today, and briefly mentions the main character. I had expected to find more content on the plot itself, but it is vaguely summarized in the following “Plot” section.

2.     Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

Everything was relevant in the article. The plot was summarized vaguely but the plot themes and inspirations were covered in painstaking detail as if it were a literature critique rather than a wiki page on an animated film. Both suspicions and confirmed details were mentioned clearly in the article i.e how Jiufen was suspected but not actually the inspiration for the Spirit town.

3.     Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or under-represented?

The film was reviewed from a Western point of view, though much of the film also has strong cultural roots in Japan, its place of conception. This means the comparisons drawn and other references will predominantly be western and can underrepresent the deepness of underlying films.

4.     Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

5.     Yes, there are 75 citation sources, many of which are credited (but commercial) institutions and companies. Even educational sources such as UMinnesota’s Otaku press, can present bias because of its specialization in animated graphics. Bias is implicit in its stance

6.     Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

The film has not changed since its latest revamping with color and voice restoration. It’s affect on modern (2010 upwards perhaps) audiences of different age groups could be observed further.

7.     Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

Yes, and the links do more than support the claims of the article, and articulate much more. Many of them are connected to the Further readings section.

8.      Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

They do talk about the Japanese cultural nuances that do not translate well through the English language, such as the good-luck charm’s possible negative connotation.

9.     How is the article rated?

According to Wikipedia’s rating system, this is a good article.

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

Firstly, the topic itself is very different from that of which we discussed in class. The topic is about a popular animated film from Japan, while the topics in class seldom become popular topics and are often about psychology. The ways that Wikipedia discusses the piece of art/the movie as opposed to a nonfiction description of theory and scientific practice will clearly show through.