User:SeraphinaLewin/sandbox 2

Article evaluation

For this article evaluation, I have chosen to evaluate the article, Point Theatre. This article is relevant to this class because it is about a late theatre in Dublin, and I believe that the stage is a crucial part of theatre. I will be assessing the assigned questions and finding a relevant example in one or more sections within the article.

In terms of evaluating the content, The Point Theatre article is successful in containing fully relevant content, but the overtly distracting emphasis on the "notable events" section leaves very little information for the "sports events" section, as well as the history of the physical building section. Overall, The Point is able to stay on topic, aside from the distracting imbalance of article content for the sections. There is also a citation that is out of date, the page contains an Error 404 Not Found as the cited source has been deleted. Cite list number 36.

Missing information that should be added to the opening paragraph is information on the material the theatre is built out of. Dates should be added in the section titled Criticism. The opening sentence; "The Point was often criticised for its poor quality of sound control and sightlines". This sentence does not specify who said this. Therefore, a notable source with the year this criticism was made is necessary to prove this information is correct. In the subsection "Wrestling" under the section "Sports Events", specific examples should be used in order to prove the claim: "The Point has hosted a number of WWE Smackdown & Raw live events." When referencing an event, it is good practice to reference a specific event that happened so the reader can find more information about the Wrestling history of The Point Theatre. As well, if you look through one of the cited event locations, it contains no reference to The Point Theatre at all, so this information is either out of date, or not accurate.

Improvements that could be made to the article are more references, as this article contains many statements that have no secondary source available to back them up, examples of these are provided in the previous answers, but one more example would be "The Point was noted for its flexible seating configurations" Noted by who? This statement needs to be referenced. The formatting could be improved as well, for example, the section of "Notable Events" would look cleaner and easier to read if the events were organized into a table chart, rather than thrown into a messy, long paragraph. The table chart should be organized by type of event, i.e dance performance, music performance; and then sorted chronologically by date.

The article remains neutral, as it does not use any words that shed a particularly positive or negative light on the theatre and its features. The list of events and accomplishments that have occured all are presented matter of factly. The underrepresented viewpoints are the criticisms of the theatre section, and who these viewpoints belong to. As well, there is no mention of overall audience satisfaction or feedback. Statistics should be included to represent the successfulness of the theatre's audience admission, and value. There does not seem to be viewpoints that are overrepresented as the article remains fairly neutral content.

The Talk Page of this article contains much of the same ideas I share, for example "This section has a problem with listing more about artists than the location itself, much as The O2 (Dublin) used to."(Autarch (talk) 17:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)). Other Wikipedians have added links and citations to facts, which is called External Link Modifying. There are not any kinds of conversations going on, though someone did go and edit the "Events section" with a thorough explanation for each edit which is good manners. The article is used for 7 WikiProjects, and has been rated C-Class, with mixed opinions of high-mid-low importance.

To conclude, though this article is rated a C-Class article, there are few major and some minor improvements that could be added to move it up as a B-Class article. It is informative and neutral, though the formatting and undercited statements should be edited and improved.

Questions addressed:


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * What else could be improved?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Citations/References
 * Talk Page
 * 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?