User:Pudding1123/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Wong Chin Foo

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because Wong Chin Foo is one of the earliest Chinese American activists who had fought for the equal rights of Chinese Americans in the wake of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. However, Wong's political activism and role in Asian American history was largely forgotten which is why I think it is important to delve into what information is currently included on Wong's Wikipedia article. Moreover, Wong's Wikipedia page is currently listed as "start-class", demonstrating that the article could likely be much more robust.

Upon my first read of the article, I thought that it was neutrally written. The biography is clearly the most developed section of Wong's page and uses a variety of sources. I think that the civil rights could be developed further, especially because the majority of the section only uses one source. I thought it was good that the article highlighted Wong's position as an advocate of Chinese American rights in the 19th century.

Evaluate the article
Lead section: I thought that the leading section was concise and highlighted the main points of Wong's biography well. However, the introductory sentence included an opinion ("one of the most prolific writers") that was not cited and only implicitly referenced to in the rest of the biography (i.e. Wong's writing was featured in North American Review and Chautauquan). Additionally, the last sentence includes an opinion that many Chinese Americans consider Wong to be like Gandhi or Dr. Martin Luther king from an unreliable source.

Content: The content is relevant to the topic. Most of the sources for the content came from 2013 or earlier, so it is possible that there has been more published articles on Wong's that could enhance the current article. The biography section is much more thorough compared to the "activism" or "in popular culture" sections, so I think that these two sections could be developed further.

Tone and Balance: The article for the most part is neutral; the two questionable claims were in the lead section and discussed above. The article also heavily focuses on Wong's defense of the Chinese community. I think it could be improved by including more evidence on ways in which Wong also alienated members of the Chinese community (e.g. Chinese Christians).

Sources and References: Many of the citations came from the same book by Scott Seligman. The links for Citation 2 and Citation 8 don't seem to take you to the page where the writer found the information for the article. One of the source is from a newspaper, which is considered unreliable.

Organization and Writing Quality: The writing for the most part is easy to understand. I thought the biography could be split into smaller sections, such as early life, life in america, etc.

Images and Media: The article only has one captioned image. I think that more images could be included to enhance the topic, such as an image of Wong's newspaper.

Talking Page Discussion: I did not see a previous talking page discussion (?). The article was rated start-class and low importance in Biography, California, China, Journalism, etc.

Overall impressions: I think that the page has a good start, but it lacking completeness. The article could utilize more sources and a greater diversity of perspectives on Wong's impact. I also think that the article could do a better job describing details of Wong's life that contribute to his relative anonymity today.