User:Samzak6/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.

I chose this article because it is long, and there is a lot of content to evaluate and comment on. I am also familiar with the book, as I read it when I was younger,
 * Name of article: A Wrinkle in Time
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

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 topic of the article is clearly highlighted my the introductory sentence. The lead also details the major themes that are explored in the book, and a summary of the plot. It also includes a comment made on the book by a scholar, which may not be necessary to understand what the article is about. Overall, the lead is concise and supplies the reader with a sufficient amount of information about the book.

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 content of the article is relevant and up-to-date. It details recent awards and film adaptations of the book. There is no missing content. The article does addresses topics related to feminism and female empowerment.

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 is neutral and there are no heavily biased claims toward a particular position.

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
There are a wide variety of sources and the links that I checked are working. This article is mainly well-sourced, but is missing some citations in the "characters" section.

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 organized into clear sections about each topic it addresses. It is easy to read, and there are no grammatical errors.

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 images do not necessarily enhance the understanding of the topic, as most of them are just different covers of the book. However, they are well-captioned and it is clear to understand what they are depicting. They adhere to copyright regulations and are visually appealing.

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
Many of the proposed edits on the talk page are about word choice and the way that things are phrased. There are also suggestions for additional sources and other images to be addded. It is rated as a B-class article, and is part of several Wikiprojects. Our class and Wikipedia have discussed this topic in a very similar manner.

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
This article is well-developed and provides a wide range of information about the book. Along with a summary, it includes major themes, awards, the ways in which the book was received by various groups of people, and many other notable topics. One way to improve the article would be add the necessary citations to the "Characters" section. Additionally, "Characters" section separates the different characters into categories. There is a "Supernatural Characters" categorization and a "Secondary Alien Characters" categorization. Since the secondary alien characters are also supernatural, perhaps they could be listed as a subsection in the "Supernatural Characters" category.

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: Talk:A Wrinkle in Time