User:Phalanx0032/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: Kinzua Bridge
 * I chose to evaluate this article as I am interested in rail transportation for my career. I searched through the Wikipedia Project for rail transport and decided to pick one of two featured articles to learn about the requirements for a featured article. I found it interesting due to the sheer scale of the bridge and the description regarding its construction.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead paragraph introduces the location and important dates for the bridge. It also lists the height and length, which although specific, seems appropriate given the bridge was one of the tallest in the US. All of the following sections are mentioned in the introduction, and it is presented in chronological order with respect to the history of the bridge, starting with its initial construction, transitioning to its rebuild for heavier trains, and ending with its destruction with a tornado.. The lead paragraph does not introduce any details that are not mentioned later in the article.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content is directly related to the topic and stays focused throughout. After discussing the construction, the article talks about the process of converting the bridge to a state park and describes in detail the build-up of the tornado that destroyed it in 2003. The article ends with a section detailing recent projects, including a new walkway that was built on the bridge in 2005. There were photographs updated in 2011 and 2019, so while there are no sections discussing events in the past 10 years, there may not have been any updates. In the section discussing the state park, there is a paragraph about the state park amenities. There is a separate article for the state park, so this section may not be needed in the article specifically for the bridge. There is also a paragraph talking about brakemen that were pranked going over the bridge in the 1900s. The detail seems specific for a general overview, but it was an interesting "fun fact."


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article gives a consistent and objective tone throughout the article. It makes a couple claims about the importance of the bridge, but it cites various organizations that made the claim. For example, American Society of Civil Engineering was cited for mentioning the importance of the bridge in the rise of coal mining. The article focused on the bridge as a tourist attraction, but only briefly discussed the purpose of the bridge when it was initially built. It would be helpful to describe the context of the bridge with respect to the greater railroad network at the time (eg: did the bridge provide a connection between Buffalo and Pittsburgh?).


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Nearly every sentence in the article has a source, and it is well-documented. Most links work, and many have been archived through "The Wayback Machine." There are several news articles, along with citations from various government agencies. The Pennsylvania DCNR is heavily referenced


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article describes each historical event with the appropriate amount of detail without providing too many details. It has also been well-edited and free of spelling and grammatical errors. The sentence structure is also appropriate, mixing short and long sentences that each focus on one specific point. It avoids technical jargon and flows naturally between the sections.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The images provide a picture of the bridge at each stage its history, including from each rebuild. For the main picture, I would suggest a photo perpendicular from the bridge if possible. It is difficult to understand the scale of the bridge from the side. There is also a photo of the ASCE plaque, which seems like more of a minor detail. The gif of the tornado radar was beneficial as it showed the scale of the storm and the map was helpful in locating the bridge. The captions are also concise but informative, though I'd add a year to the cover image. All images follow copyright rules and have been properly sourced. It'd be beneficial to stagger the images between the right and left sides, but they are evenly spaced throughout the article to break-up the text..


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The article is featured and is a part of seven WikiProjects, including those for historic sites, Pennsylvania, and civil engineering. The talk page discussed mainly whether this article fulfilled the requirements for a featured article. There were also discussions about renaming the page and the physics behind its collapse.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall, this article is well-written and provides a thorough overview of the history of the bridge. There were no gaps in information that left me wanting more detail, and there were several side notes put in that made it an interesting read. Given the overlap with the Kinzua State Park article, I would suggest either moving more of the details about the state park to that article.


 * 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?

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: