User:Tammyzhang0/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: Braiding Sweetgrass (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I noticed that this article doesn't seem to have an active talk page and was interested in seeing if there's any room for improvement/discussion. I've also read passages from this book before and was curious about if the Wikipedia page represents it well.

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
While the lead is brief, it appears to contain most of the crucial facts (basic overview of content, title/publisher/author). It refers to the book's content and reviews, although it does not mention the awards section (which is also short).

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The article's content is relevant, but the sources largely seem to be from 2019 or earlier. There might be relevant information from the last year that isn't represented. I'm also curious about the sidebar's mention of preceding and following works, which haven't been linked or mentioned in the article.

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
Overall, the article seems to be written objectively. However, there are only positive reviews represented, not any neutral or negative ones.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
As mentioned earlier, there doesn't appear to be any sources from 2020. A quick online search pulls up some reviews that weren't mentioned in the article thus far. Otherwise, the sources all seem to be very reliable and high quality. The links that I tried worked well.

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
I'd be interested in checking if "Journal of Germanic Studies" merits its own page like the other journals mentioned in the article (with the exception of the Native Studies Review, which is currently a red link and might be worth looking into as its own article). The article seems well-written and well-organized. I'd also be curious about seeing if there's anything that can be added to the honors section.

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
The talk page has a banner suggesting that an image be added, so that might be good to look into. I'm not entirely sure what kind of image would fit best, but it's worth considering for sure.

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
The talk page thus far does not have any community dialogue. It does mention the article's status as C-class however, and also mentions that an image has been requested to improve the article. It's part of four different WikiProjects.

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 content of the article so far is strong and well-sourced/well-written, but I get the sense that more content can probably be added (especially to the reviews section). It does seem to be a bit short, although I'm not sure how long/in-depth the contents section of a book article should be.

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: