User:Princebeans/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: Palazzo Albertoni Spinola
 * This article has a near empty talk section, suggesting it has been worked on very little. The grammar needs some work (not a massive issue but there's room for improvement) and it lacks many of wikipedia's standard requirements like proper citations and intro sentences. The History section, for example, does not have a single citation despite being lengthy. Not only that, but there are several incidents of analysis of the architectural features.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead does not introduce the building properly, launching straight into architectural features without first describing the building's purpose. There is no description of the article's sections and no indication of why this building deserves its own page. I think the lead is far too short and what information it does have is often not properly placed within the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions

The history section is riddled with information specific to the various families that lived there but is not necessarily linked to the building in any significant way. Also, there is a section titled "Special visual features" that is almost entirely a personal analysis of the intent and effects of the building's architecture that is not only irrelevant, but also against Wikipedia's guidelines.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

This article attempts to convince the reader of the effect of certain visual features without first justifying why that would be relevant. Is this building important enough architecturally that there would have been some debate over this? If so, more Point of views needed to be showcased.


 * 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

The number one issue with this article is lack of proper citation. As stated previously, the entire first section lacks a single citation and there are numerous lcaims throughout that als need some kind of reference.


 * 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

This article needs to be heavily edited for grammar and flow. There are sentences and ideas that are repeated and it makes it difficult to follow. The sections themselves make sense with the exception of "Special visual effects" which is almost entirely analysis.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The visuals are used effectively, however lack proper citations and therefore do not meat Wikipedia guidelines.


 * 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

There has been no discussion in the talk page.

Every Wikiproject concerned with it (mostly historical and architectural ones) have rated it as C class


 * 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

Personally, I find this article to be unhelpful, incomplete, and in violation of many of Wikipedia's guidelines. It is not written clearly, lacks proper citation, and is weighted with bias.


 * 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: