User:Nordicmagpie/sandbox

Article Evaluation:

Cult of Carts


 * Nothing distracting - everything in the article pertains to the subject matter
 * No information from sources that are newer than 1984
 * Article is neutral in tone, but as I noted above, possible biased view from such limited sources.
 * Not all facts are cited - for ex. 20th C. writers are said to have romanticized the phenomenon, but no names are mentioned, or examples given.
 * All sources are from Art History or Architecture Histories - nothing from an independent source. Biased?
 * There is no talk page for this article.
 * It's not part of any Wikiprojects and is not rated.
 * There is not enough citations, some of the wording is vague, and the sources are old and possibly biased.

ARTICLE SELECTION (10/4/2018) :

High Bridge, Lincoln


 * Part of WikiProject Architecture, (stub-class, mid-importance), listed as needing additional citations from reliable sources.
 * The article itself is very short - dates are given without much authority, (word 'about' is used often).
 * grammar issues throughout the article - weak sentence structures, word choices, etc.


 * last paragraph re: flooding is called into question in the talk page - no citations given to support claims about flooding or the possible reason for name of the bridge.
 * last time edited was in 2017, as was last time talk page was used.

Court of the Lions


 * Part of WikiProject Architecture, (start-class, not rated yet), listed as needing more work all around, i.e. more citations, organization work, general grammar issues.
 * Only 5 sources cited for the whole article, which is a small amount of sources and citations for an article of this size. (Not a stub, but decent sized)
 * {further explanation} is marked as needed in the very first paragraph.
 * Background and Influences section has a lot of information that is not cited - without citations, it looks like conjecture.


 * Has been edited this year, so still being worked on currently by other editors.

Carrara Cathedral


 * Part of WikiProject Architecture, (start-class, mid-importance), biggest problem with article is that NO sources cited in entire article.
 * last time revised was in 2013
 * nothing on the talk page at all
 * article is alarmingly large to have no citations in it - nothing to back up anything the author is saying.
 * writing is not strong, and not very academic. It is fairly neutral in tone, but the lack of sources really hurts the credibility of the article.