User:Pondertorium/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: Manti
 * I have seen manti on restaurant menus in Philly and would love to learn more about this Turkish dumpling.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes. The Lead introductory sentence states what manti is and where it is found.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead does give a brief description of the section on regional variations of manti, which comprises the majority of the article, but it makes no mention of mantis history (the first major section of the article).
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The last sentence of the Lead is a statement about the linguistics of the word manti and its plural-singular forms in the English language. This is neither cited nor mentioned later in the article and does not fit with the section on history or the sections on regional significance.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is relatively concise, although it is filled with lingo detailing the various other names of dumplings that manti resemble. In addition, the introductory sentence includes pronunciation information for manti in several languages, which makes the opening line difficult to parse.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. The article begins with the origins of the food and then discusses its variations in different regions around the world. Visual content is also good and helps show the differences between styles of manti.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content seems up to date, especially as this topic is not a rapidly evolving subject nor does it change drastically over time. However, there are also a few citations since 2010 which detail its popularity and uses now. Thus, all content still seems relevant, useful, and up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * While there are no content gaps per se, the sections on regional variations go in depth into detail on how their manti is prepared. However, only one of these sections describes customs relating to eating the manti, which would be a welcome and informative addition to the other sections.
 * There is a line in the Bosnian cuisine section about "The second type" of dumpling. However, this sentence does not describe a type of manti, nor is it clear what the second type refers to even by reading the rest of the paragraph.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Not especially. While it does deal with various cultural interpretations of manti, none of these wold be considered historically underrepresented populations and the article does nothing to address these populations outside of their preparation style.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes. There do not appear to be opinions or value-judgements toward any particular aspect of manti around the world.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are a few sentences in the regions style sections that are not cited, very formally written, and describe a very specific preparation likely common to the editor. While these claims are simply descriptions of types of manti, they are nonetheless clearly written by someone using personal knowledge.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There is perhaps too much content devoted to East Asian precursors to manti, focusing on foods from China and Korea. There is not an inordinate amount of time spent on these ideas, but it does seem slightly out of place for an article related to Turkish cuisines.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No. Statements are very matter of fact and descriptive, and few claims are unsupported or intended to read as persuasive.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * There are a handful of statements that are not cited. For example, the aforementioned claim about linguistics is un-cited and doesn't return int he content sections. In addition, one of the sources was tagged as potentially questionable by another Wikipedia for being a self-published source. I'm not sure what the policy is on sources like these. There are however quite a few cuisines with no references, which is concerning. For example, the section on Bosnian manti has no citations anywhere in the section. The same is true for Kazakh, as well as a few others.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources used seem to be reputable and from a range of disciplines. Many are published by Oxford University Press and and reflect a variety fo viewpoints from historical texts to cookbooks and modern trends in food.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Nearly all sources are from the 21st century, and at least half are post 2010, so the sources are current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * The sources do seem to reflect a variety of authors with Turkish and other central Asian heritage, which is good to see in a medium where so much of food writing is written by and for white people. There are texts by Chinese authors on the history and origins of manti in China, and texts from Turkish authors about manti's preparation. There is one reference to a work by Fuchsia Dunlop, a white author well known for her writings on East Asia, so perhaps this source could be updated to include research performed by a Chinese food historian instead.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All links I tested linked straight to the proper source.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is concise and easy to read. It is also clear, and, although the grammar is off occasionally, this does not interfere with understanding.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There are no spelling errors but the grammar is clunky and error-prone in parts. Clause to clause agreement is often off and fluctuations between different levels of formality make the grammar strange. For example, the last few sentences in the section of Afghan cuisine.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Organization is very good, with a clear progression from history to regional styles that makes sense. Each section is broken down into a few paragraphs that explain differences with other regional styles before examining cooking methods and, at times, eating customs.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes. The images depict regional varieties of manti which works together with the text to show how manti varies around the world.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * All images have captions. They are very short and to the point, but probably say all they ought to say as is.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * It appears that all images are either the work of the Wikipedia who uploaded the image or are in the public domain with sufficient information.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes. Images are grouped geographically and arranged in the section to which the photos pertain.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are many conversations about sources, including credibility (lots of comments about credibility) and modifying citations. There are also quite a few conversations about describing what content belongs in the article and what doesn't, specifically between manti and other types of Asian dumplings. One conversation suggested splitting the article in two to address this issue of inappropriate content for manti-specific page. Finally, as I mentioned above, there were a handful of comments about inappropriate tone as being too informal and personal.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is part or 5 WikiProjects, all rated Start-Class and most as Low-Importance. I'm not sure how to find how the article is rated.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not yet discussed the article in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I'm not sure if an article's status is listed as some categorization on the page, and if so where to find it?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The history section is very strong, concisely chronicling scholarly theories about the origins of the food and how it likely traveled across the Silk Road from China before spreading to the Middle East. The claims here are all cited with reputable sources, and there are no persuasive claims or grammatical errors in this section.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article could be improved by removing personal accounts of how manti is treated in editor's respective countries and instead supplanted with cited information. In addition, information as to how and when manti is eaten across the world would add context to sections that rely nearly entirely on descriptions of how the dumplings are prepared.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article seems relatively complete in terms of history. Although the section is short, it is unclear how much research has actually been performed on the topic and so it seems most of what is known is described here. The talk page describes a few more regional preparations of manti that could be added to the article, but lack proper sources, instead relying on personal knowledge. If sources for these styles could be found, this would benefit the page.

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: