User:Phoenix 1620/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: First Opium War
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because the information is concise and informative. The article is also a neutral stance of someone from the outside explain the past historic events.

Lead
Yes, the article starts off with a topic sentence that explains that the article will focus on the opium wars in China from 1839 to 1842. The article briefly describes the sections that it intends to cover. The article focuses on formation outlined throughout it, expanding one multiple points. It is concise and straight to the point.
 * 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?

Content
The content is relevant to the topic, and it focuses on the time of the most major advancements in the trade of opium in China. This article does cover topics that is widely known and covers a large span of time.
 * 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?

Tone and Balance
It is neutral and there is no bias throughout the article. There are not any viewpoints that are over or under represented as it is more of an essay recounting events. The author does not persuade the reader in anyway.
 * 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?

Sources and References
There is a page where the article outlines all resources used. They are split into two different groups older sources and recent sources. There are multiple authors used from different sources. All links lead to previews of the works and not the whole write up. Some are links lead to summaries of the works where they only exist in physical copies.
 * 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?

Organization
The article is well written and it is very easy to read. There are no errors and the the information is broken down into multiple sections.
 * 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?

Images and Media
The images that are included and pictures of people who are notable, as well as maps that outline trade routes. These are important in helping the reader make connections and understand the article better. The images are appropriate for use on wikipedia.
 * 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?

Checking the talk page
There are few entires about fixing links for citations as well as phrasing of Chinese names and why they should be a certain way. The article is rated C for China and Hong Kong, and B for United Kingdom and military history on wikiprojects. It is the same as discussed in class.
 * 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?

Overall impressions
It is listed as a level 4 vital article in history with a B class ranking. The article is well organized and easy to navigate, though some areas could be moved closer together for expediency of reading. It is well developed as there is a wealth of information, large amounts of citations, laid out in an organized matter, and easy to read.
 * 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?

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: