User:Samara.SJ/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: Harlequin
 * I chose to evaluate this article to have a broader understanding of character types in Commedia Dell'Arte, and I found the comedic servant or zanni characters to be especially interesting and entertaining in this style of acting.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


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

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * mostly updated some sources need updating
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * more in depth research needed (nothing specifically missing to my present lack of knowledge but more research will benefit this article greatly)

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * no

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * could be more thorough
 * Are the sources current?
 * sources are relatively current (need more current works to pull from though)
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * its is decently written needs work
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * few grammatical errors
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * needs better clarity in its major topic points, so that the paragraphs are more clear and direct

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * one image
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * article needs to be revamped overall
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-Class / Mid-Importance
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * article mentions some of the clown characteristic we have very briefly discussed in class and the image alludes to the mask work talked about in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * C-Class status ; it is apart of a greater piece little overall importance according to its status as not being a MAIN article
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * history of the character style
 * How can the article be improved?
 * way more research needs to be done so that the topic is more clearly described in depth, also it needs a better layout and a new lead paragraph.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * decently developed, very surface level understanding of topic though

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: