User:Palmerhawaii/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Archaeology of Samoa

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I found this article in the c-class articles and thought it might be interesting to learn about Samoan archaeology, something I know almost nothing about. It is important because we have a lot of Samoans in Hawaii and in my courses so I thought it would be fun to learn more about Samoan prehistory.

Lead section
The lead section doesn't really give an overview of the rest of the article but rather seems to provide some random bits of information that aren't really developed later in the rest of the article. Most of the article covers the different sites in Samoa but the lead section doesn't really connect these diverse archaeological sites together or introduce them in any way. One potential solution would be to add sections on Polynesia and Samoan origins and more on dating or to add more information about the development and history of Samoan archaeology.

Content
The article focuses on different archaeological sites in Samoa but needs more about other aspects of Samoan archaeology. The latest archaeological research discussed in the article is 2002. That means that this article hasn't included the last 20 years of Archaeology in Samoa. Including more recent scholarship is an important addition to improving this article. Although there is a good discussion of each site, it might be important to provide more details of the significance of each site to ongoing archaeological research. The content can also include topics mentioned in the lead around Polynesia migration and evidence of the first settlers to arrive in Samoa.

Tone and Balance
Overall the article is neutral and unbiased. It is largely a list of diffferent archaelogical research sites and the work that was carried out there. It would benefit from knowing some of the key findings, debates, and discussion surrounding Samoan archaeology.

Sources and References
Almost all of the references for the article are from peer reviewed scientific articles. Not all of the sources have full citations so there could be some improvement made to the bibliography. One of the most important improvements would be to include more up to date research and more research that summarizes archaeological understandings on Samoan prehistory.

Organization and writing quality
The writing is clear and concise. There is some extra information that is unnecessary, given the overall length of the article.

Images and Media
The article includes a number of good images that improve the article. In general these photos are well captioned and support the articles content. There is some discussion in the talk page about including an image of Lapita pottery, which does not exist across wikipedia.

Talk page discussion
The article is rated a C-class article with a mid-importance. It is marked as high importance for wikiproject Samoa and is also part of the wikiproject archaeology. There is some discussion about whether or not to include archaeology of American Samoa which currently does not have an article.

Overall impressions
The quality of the references make this article a good beginning that needs to be further developed. A lot can be developed from the existing sources as well as some research into more recent Samoan archaeology.