User:Smtayl5/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Sir Gowther

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I read Sir Gowther a not to long ago, but I couldn't remember the name and it was difficult to find by just describing it. Since it seems to be a little bit obscure, I decided to evaluate it.

Evaluate the article
This article has a solid understanding of the story of Sir Gowther, which is great for being one of the more obscure Middle-English tales. Here are some areas that can be improved:

• The summarization in the lead was accurate to the story and the content is relevant. However, the summarization was in one long sentence and there were two quotations, so the content did not flow as smoothly as it could have. Consider breaking the large sentence down into multiple sentences and address the quote more thoroughly so the subject matter is clearer.

•There were three references to other works within the "Plot" section of the article (Sir Orfeo, Ipomedon, and Tintagel). Although their association to Sir Gowther does make them relevant, their presence in that section made them appear to be irrelevant, as they did not further the summarization. They can be more effective if they are relocated to the "Legends" section.

• I liked that there is an acknowledgement of which manuscript was used for the "Plot" section. Perhaps create a second Plot section for the other manuscript.

• I appreciated the content comparing the differences between the two manuscripts of the story because it let me as a reader know that if I read Sir Gowther, there could be different implications of its message depending on the copy I read. Consider acknowledging if there is or isn't a scholarly preference to one of the manuscripts.

• The content was updated last on August 3rd, 2021, so it is up to date as far as review. However, the majority of the sources cited come from 1995, which is not up to date. Additionally, there were authors that were used multiple times, which gives limited insight on the topic. Consider looking for more recent and/or differing opinions (if there are any).

• One area that could use more specificity is the "Legends" section, which is devoted to the comparison of older legends to the story of Gowther. It was not established if any of the comparisons that were made are widely excepted or challenged. Because of this it is difficult to say whether these viewpoints are overrepresented or underrepresented.

• The image of the "Illustration of pride at folio" does not relate to the topic in a clear enough way for it to be included. I searched for images of Gowther and the main result was the image from this article. An image including devils/demons is a good idea, but the content of this image suggests that there was direct conflict with Gowther and devils, which was not the case.

• I would change the "Plot" section to past tense instead of present tense. Additionally, I would alter some of the language so it doesn't sound as literary.


 * "He rapes with relish..." This can be reworded to 'he eagerly raped' or something to that sound.
 * " Indeed, the tournament where..." The indeed can be omitted.

• One minor thing, I think "Ipomedon" should be linked to its Wikipedia page. It isn't linked in the Plot or Legends section