User:Sfh3/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: Amalia Kahana-Carmon
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.Sandbox

I chose to evaluate the article about Amalia Kahana-Carmon because I may choose to contribute to her Wikipedia article for my classroom assignment. Furthermore, the topics of her writing are interesting to me.

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 article contains a lead that concisely describes the article's topic; however, it does not describe all of the article's main sections such as literary themes or the general biography. It is possible that this is because there is so little information actually discussed in the article. Moreover, the lead mentions that Amalia Kahana-Carmon was a literary critic; however, there is no other information about this aspect of her life written in the article.

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?

Content evaluation
All of the content included is relevant to the topic, but there is little information given. There could be more information about how she won each of the awards, where the literary themes are found in her books, the impact of her work, etc. It is also possible that the information is not up-to-date because the article mentions that Amalia Kahana-Carmon died on January 16, 2019, but the last event mentioned about her prior to her death occurred in 2000.

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 seems very neutral. There is not enough information presented for the writer to persuade the reader of any position. If anything, it is possible that the section on literary themes includes some bias since it is an interpretation of her work, but the information is cited from what seems to be a reliable source.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All of the information seems to come from a reliable source, but in the biography and awards sections, there are no citations. The information in these sections may have come from the sources listed, but that is not certain. The links to the sources themselves worked, and they are current considering the topic.

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 information included in the article is well-written, and there are no distracting spelling or grammatical errors. Moreover, the information that is given is easy to follow and organized into distinct categories.

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
This article included no images. A picture of Amalia Kahana-Carmon at the minimum would be a good addition.

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
There is a talk page that includes some basic information about the article such as the WikiProjects it is apart of, its importance as a part of these projects, and its class as a stub. More specifically, this article is part of WikiProject Biography (Arts and Entertainment), WikiProject Israel, and WikiProject Women Writers. It is possible that talk pages on different articles that are a part of these projects would provide relevant information about what to include in this article.

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
The information in the article is relevant and reliable; however, it is lacking depth. To improve the article, one would have to find more secondary sources about Amalia Kahana-Carmon's life and expand on details about her career as an author and literary critic.

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: