User:SamPerreira/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Antiquarian

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose to evaluate this article specifically because in anthropology we focus a lot in archaeology. Antiquarians are often regarded as some of the earliest archaeologists, so I have read about them a lot within class. This matters because Antiquarianism is a topic that I already have somewhat of an understanding of therefore I can better understand the importance of true and un-biased information within the article. This ways others may use the article in the future as well. My first impressions of this article is it's a bit shorter in length but it still seems to provide a lot of quality background information regarding the topic it is focused on. There are also many sources and links located within the article for people to look at.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Review by SamPerriera

Lead Section


 * Lead section includes a concise introduction sentence that provides background information for the word antiquarian.
 * The rest of the lead section does delve into more detail about what antiquarians are. However a suggestion I would give is for the lead section to provide a brief summary about what the articles main sections will be focusing on.
 * The lead in this article does a good job at staying on topic.
 * Overall the lead is very concise and would provide a quick and easy introduction for someone looking to simply understand what an antiquarian is.

Content


 * This article is relevant to the topic at hand and the information within the article continues to be updated so the content to up-to-date and useful for researching this topic
 * Perhaps in the section titled Antiquarianism in Ancient China it would be helpful to provide more information regarding the scholars that worked with ancient artifacts. Why was interest in antiquarianism suddenly revived by scholars like Gwu Yanwu and Yan Ruoju?
 * The article is fair and informational. It is not trying to persuade the reader of anything rather it does a good job at informing about the topic. Though the article does not address any topics of underrepresented groups of people. That may be something of interest to add, as there is much controversy surrounding the topic of archaeology.

Tone and Balance


 * This article is neutral about antiquarianism. Nothing is stated in the content presented give off the impression that the author wants readers to feel a certain way about this topic.
 * There are multiple viewpoints given regarding antiquarianism from around the world. Though I think there should be more information given regarding minority groups positions on the topic as well as historical place within this topic
 * Still article is not trying to persuade readers to feel negatively or positively about the topic.

Sources and References


 * All of the facts presented in the article are backed up by sources that are thorough and do pertain to the what the wiki article is about
 * Many of the sources are quite old. It may be beneficial to find some more current studies about this topic so that all information within the article is current and recognizes any new information that may have been found on the topic.
 * There are many sources used in the article, but not a very diverse spectrum. Having more sources from authors of different races, genders, and cultures may help with the problem pertaining to a lack of point of view from underrepresented groups.
 * There are many good sources that come from University papers linked in the article. All of the links work properly.

Organization and Writing Quality


 * This article is well written and quite easy to read. All of the information within it is organized properly and in a way that is easy to follow.
 * There does not seem to be any spelling errors or grammatical mistakes.
 * All of the main points of the article are neatly organized into proper sections and titled in a way that is easy to understand.

Images and Media


 * There are many pictures in this article that help to enhance the reader's understanding of the topic as they are relevant to what is being discussed in the section they are located in.
 * The images are also well captioned so the reader can get a good grasp on what is being depicted in said image. They have the proper citations meaning all of the pictures have links attached to them that show where the author got them from
 * They are laid out in a way that does not mess with the formatting of the writing but they are still easy to find and visually appealing.

Talk Page Discussion


 * Within the talk page there are editors discussing the information in the article and whether information should be added or omitted. The conversations seem to be respectful and helpful toward each other.
 * The article is of interest to three WikiProjects: Archaeology, History, and Classical Greek and Rome. It is rated a C-class on all of these.
 * The main differences between this article and the way we discuss these topics in class is the lack of minority perspective and some parts lack a bit more background information.

Overall Impressions


 * The overall status of this article is it has some very good starting information and it does well at outlining important points regarding this topic. However it could use a bit more expansion in certain areas of information.
 * The strengths of this article is how well organized it is for the reader to quickly find the information they need. The pictures add more helpful background visuals as well. This article is also easy to understand.
 * My main suggestions for improvement would be, adding a section to the article that discusses antiquarianism from the point of view of cultures that are often overlooked and underrepresented. As well as the other controversies regarding antiquarianism. This could be done by adding updated sources of information from a more diverse group of people. I think the lead should also have a little more information about what the main points of the article are going to be.
 * With all of this being said I think this article is on the right track, there are just certain areas that are a bit under-developed and would benefit from some more important information.