User:Rosa banksiae/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The Book of the Courtier

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because we read excerpts from this book in class, so I am somewhat familiar with its contents.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

In my opinion, one weakness of this article is in the lead section. Beginning with the first summary sentence, there are too many specifics. These details make the style cluttered and difficult to follow especially toward the end of the section. Information appears in this section which does not appear elsewhere in the article. There is also some phrasing which might be viewed as biased or overly interpretive (e.g. "poignantly nostalgic evocation of an idealized milieu") and some uncited information (e.g. "The work was composed over the course of twenty years, beginning in 1508, and ultimately published in 1528 by the Aldine Press in Venice just before the author's death.")

Content

Most (if not all) of the content is relevant to the topic. I found the "Reception" section especially useful and clear.

Tone and Balance

The "Rhetoric" section of the article is overly long compared to the rest, and has been flagged for "undue weight." User Mballen observes on the Talk page specifies that the sections gives undue weight to one particular scholar, Wayne Rebhorn, and that the focus on rhetoric is overly heavy while a plethora of other topics remain unaddressed.

Sources and References

At an admittedly cursory glance, the articles seems to have a fair number of references from reputable sources like academic journals and encyclopedias. Some information in the article remains uncited. I am not in a position to judge how accurately these sources are used, whether they provide a fair and balanced survey (although others have raised this concern), or whether there are better or more current sources available.

Overall Impressions

Overall, I found the quality of this article to be quite middling. It is underdeveloped in many areas, with other areas poorly developed. I think that it could benefit from edits for clarity, organization, professionalism, and neutrality.