User:Rrlaljani/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.


 * Prison Notebooks
 * The class I am enrolled in is about the history of socialism. The Prison Notebooks were written by influential Italian socialist and communist leader Antonio Gramsci, a thinker whose work is also commonly referenced in historical discussions.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The Lead contains an introductory sentence that concisely and accurately describes the article's topic. However, the remainder of the Lead is badly organized and at times repetitive in its content. Additionally, the Lead contains information not expanded on in the body of the article. This said, the end of the Lead does provide a good topic-by-topic overview of the major sections of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The article's content is relevant and up-to-date. There is no missing content or content that does not belong with respect to the Lead. The article does address a topic related to a historically underrepresented population as Gramsci was a prisoner at the time of writing Prison Notebooks, and Gramsci also suffered from Pott disease, which left him severely hunchbacked and with a variety of chronic medical conditions.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article deals with political topics and is thus inherently susceptible to bias. However, sufficient sources are cited from multiple academic viewpoints, resulting in a semblance of neutrality for the topics discussed. On this note, the selection of sub-topics from Prison Notebooks may also be subject to bias, but I do not know enough about the topic to evaluate this balance.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
A lot of the article references separate Wikipedia pages, but very few sub-sections are supported by more than one reliable secondary source. This is a travesty, as a metric ton of literature has been written about the topics covered by Gramsci's writings and the specific subtopics the article's author has chosen to write about. The sources cited, however, are current and diverse, though they do not include historically marginalized points of view. All the links in the article work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is often confusing to read, though it is unclear whether this is the author's fault, as the concepts discussed in the Prison Notebooks are simply so dense. I am leaning toward giving the author credit, as the article is free of grammatical and spelling errors, and aside from the fuzzy Lead, is well-organized.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
The article includes two images, one of Antonio Gramsci, and one of an exhibition of the Prison Notebooks. These images adhere to the copyright regulations. They are not however, laid out in a visually appealing way, as they are too small, not spread throughout the article, and not wrapped with text.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
The only entry on the talk page, dated November 2019, blasts the lack of cited sources that actually pertain to the Prison Notebooks. The article falls under the purview of two WikiProjects (Socialism & Books). In the Socialism WikiProject, the article is rated at a C, and of mid-importance. In the Books WikiProject, the article is considered "Start class."

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
The article's overall status requests more citations to reliable sources. The article's strengths are its focus on the substance of the Prison Notebooks, yet its organization and referencing of literature can both be improved. I think the article is complete in scope, but not well-developed.