User:Scg106/Evaluate an Article

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

Leftovers (podcast)

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 this article to evaluate because I love the show Leftovers and am surprise how its popularity on YouTube does not translate over to a thorough Wikipedia article. It is a significant part of YouTube podcast social lore and it is important it is represented on Wikipedia. My first impression of the article is that it is pretty short and there is not an adequate list of episodes (unlike other podcast Wikipedia entries).

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.)

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?


 * Yes everything is relevant

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?


 * Episode List
 * More background on the relationship between Ethan & Hasan
 * Description of the set
 * Descriptions of overall dynamics
 * Controversies

Can you identify any notable equity gaps? Does the article underrepresent or misrepresent historically marginalized populations?


 * Not necessarily applicable to this article, covers only the podcast and leaders
 * Would do further research to see if the article does not cover specific guests or issues that would be historically underrepresented

What else could be improved?


 * Overall, there isn't a lot of information at all
 * It is rated "Start-class" by Wikipedia on the Talk Page
 * The above list of missing information must be added


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Since the article is so short, it is difficult to tell if there is any skew/bias
 * I think it is represented pretty objectively, overall
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Addressed above in relation to potential missing interviews or covered issues
 * Controversy section is missing
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The links I clicked on worked
 * All sources seem relevant
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Some of the references might not be reliable, but since these articles are covering internet drama, they are often from small, online publications that don't always seem super reliable
 * the sources seemed more geared towards drama and controversy
 * no bias is noted
 * Do the sources come from a diverse array of authors and publications?
 * I think so, some from the guests themselves and some from third-parties
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * there is no talk page as of now
 * the edit history only notes 2 contributors
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Rated as start-class, low-importance
 * part of WikiProject Podcasting
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * N/A