User:Paola.Franco-Negron/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: Nefertari
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I choose this article because since I was a little girl, I always liked to read egyptian history.

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
The article include an introductory sentence that connect the reader with the topic. Before every subtheme it includes a brief sentence which summarizes all the information the paragraph will talk about. I think the Lead is very concise and direct with the topic, it has the details needed to understand the topic.

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
The content of this article is very focus on the principal theme, the last edition was on August 30, 2020. That shows me that the information provided is not that old, is very current. The article has information that connects the reader with other characters that maybe we studied before such as Ramesses II and Ay (pharaoh on the 18th dynasty). It mention details about Nefertari's tomb and the place where it was found. I think, the content is very complete in this article.

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
The article represents a neutral point of view about Nefertari, in other words, the author never provides a personal opinion about Nefertari's family or her position on dynasty. It doesn't tries to persuade the reader in favor of a position. Provides a lot of differents points of views and information about the theme.

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
All the facts on the article are backed up by reliable sources, it use some books as a source and it mention the author and the page of the book that is using. The links it provides are very helpful, I checked some of them and they are full of information to make easier the understanding process.

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
The article is very organized, it has some words that are hard to understand but despite that, is very organized and structured. The article had different sections, to divide different subtopics about the principal theme. It also had a list with points of the different sub themes that the article will present to the reader.

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
The article included many images that helped me to understand the information, it also included a lot of links that provide good information to understand the article. All the images include a mall description, but they didn't have the link of where the author found the image. The reader can see them very easily, they are good and interesting images.

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 article is rated as C-Class article, and is part of three WikiProjects (WikiProjects Biography/ Royalty and Nobility, WikiProject Ancient Egypt and WikiProject Women's History). On they talk, the conversations are about some other images of Nefertari, and about some dates that someone is asking if the author can include them to amplify the information of the article.

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
The article's strengths are the images, the links of informations, some references and the information it provides. Some weaknesses are the words it use, some of them are very hard to understand, and the facts that it didn't include some dates that are considered very important when you give this type of information. Despite this weaknesses, the article is well-developed and strong on the information.

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: