User:Seline.messmer/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: Antonio Manetti
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have chosen this article as I thought Manetti was a fascinating figure and I was surprised to find that he was given so little attention in the article.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It does indeed have a lead
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No it does not.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? There is not much to the article apart from the lead.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is too concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? It is.
 * Is the content up-to-date? It was last edited on 17 October 2020, at 05:19, however, there is still much to be added.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is content missing
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? It does not.

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? No.
 * Are the sources current? To some degree.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes and No.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they do.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is too short and not well structured.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not to my understanding.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Not at all.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes.
 * 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? No.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Minor edits and recent reference.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rates S.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The person isn't given much attention.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved? It can be structured in a better manner with much more attention given to the work of the person.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is not well-developed.

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: