User:Snitikins/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: The Lele of the Kasai
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have an interest in anthropology and I think the Wikipedia page for a book will give me a chance both to see a less filled out Wikipedia page and learn about the topic

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?
 * yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Some of the biographical info about Mary Douglass is not in the article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The sentence structure is convoluted and difficult to read

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes its about the book chapters
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * yep
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The articles lists some reviews but doesn't explore them/ talk about the critical reception
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * The article is about a book written by a woman and is part of the wiki:project on women

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yeah
 * 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?
 * nope, added tag
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * no they seem limited in number
 * Are the sources current?
 * meh, it uses her biography from 1999
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * no, really only one source
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yep

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Some of the sentence are long and difficult to read
 * 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?
 * yeah

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * yeah its got the book cover
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes the image is fair use
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * yes

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 talk page is mostly empty
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated start-class, low importance. It is part of the wikiprojects on anthropology, books, and women writers
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Not relevant

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It's a start-class article
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It provides a good description of each chapter and is organized clearly with few errors
 * How can the article be improved?
 * It is lacking in sources and could use more content about things other than the chapters
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is developed fully with the content it has, but is short at the moment and could use some more.

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: