User:Sgibbs44/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: Internet art
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This article stood out to me because I have always been interested in the arts, and I would like to further explore how artist are using the internet to make interactive pieces of artwork. The internet can be used in an infinite amount of ways and I want to learn more about how this technology can be molded into a creative art form.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The article only has one major section being History and Context. Besides that there is a list of artists who fall under internet art and references. The lead section mainly focuses on defining the term Internet Art and explaining what constitutes being defined as such and what does not. Besides the definition the lead section does not really include a description of the article's major section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? The lead provides a general definition which is expanded upon in the article through history and context.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? No. The article focuses on the history of Internet art and this information does not go past the mid-2000s. There is no content regarding the current state of internet art over a decade later in 2020.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes there is content that is missing. The article's main and only focus is the history and context. The article also has a section that list artist. Some content that can help to improve is looking at Internet Art today and also expanding on some of the artist rather than just ending with a hyperlinked list. Maybe also exploring different types and methods of internet art.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes. There was a link added into external links that was to an editor's art page but has since been removed. The information itself is neutral
 * 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? In the lead section some of the definitions can use a citation.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? The latest sources come from 2012, some newer sources could be found.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes the bibliography contains sources from a diverse spectrum of men and women as well as foreign sources in Spanish and German speaking countries.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Generally yes, however there are a few sentences that could be made more clear.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Besides the lead there is really only one section. There is room for more information that can be organized under a different section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No. Images would be fitting to enhance the understanding of Internet Arts to show some famous examples.
 * Are images well-captioned? There are no Images
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There are no Images
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There are no Images

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The main conversation was from 2006-2009 that debated on the external link section. One side believed that the link section was long, messy and unnecessary and the other wanted to keep the links. One person in particular was biased because one of the links up for debate was a link to their internet art gallery. Another problem was that the links were to online art galleries which is not considered internet art. Since the discussion, the external link section has been cleaned up and now there are only two links remaining.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated Start Class and is part of WikiProject Public Art aiming to improve coverage on public art.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This article applies to our class discussions about the internet and how the internet can serve different purposes for different groups. We discussed scientific and military uses of the internet, this topic shows the artistic uses of the internet.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is rated as start class, it has relevant information but requires more to further develop the topic.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article clearing defines the topic in the lead.
 * How can the article be improved? The article needs citations in the lead and more information throughout.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is underdeveloped due to the fact that there is only one main section.

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: