User:Practicingtoedit/Evaluate an Article

Evaluating content


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * All in all I felt like the article was very relavant to the topic. It included all the information that would be needed when searching for an actual movie. Nothing was too distracting.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * The one thing i've seen before and liked about certain wiki's about movies is the breakdown of the worldwide, domestic, and international gross. It's not too important but it's always a nice little piece of information to include in these types of pages.
 * What else could be improved?
 * I feel like one thing that could have been changed was the format. At the very bottom of the article it talks about the truman show delusion. I feel like that's something important and maybe should be above the release and critical reception sub header.

= Evaluating tone =


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

The article seemed neutral in the sense it didn't show any bias (as it was just explaining the context of the movie and production) but even in the critical reception it was all hard facts and actual reviews by different critics as opposed to "I didn't like this movie because so and so". Because of this, there were no viewpoints that were overrepresented or vice versa. It was a very factual and unbiased document about a movie.

= Evaluating sources =


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Do the sources come from a diverse array of authors and publications?

The links that I checked out seem to be working and they all cite the exact place where they got their information from. They all seem to be reliable and ones you would put in a wiki page. It also comes from a wide array of different sources rather than just one indicating different viewpoints and unbiased information.

= Checking the talk page = Now take a look at how others are talking about this article on the talk page.


 * 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?

They seem to be talking about a variety of different things, ranging from plot mistakes to inside information on the chemistry between casts. I feel like they talk about such different things and they can be so informal on these pages which is quite interesting.