User:Taram21/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: Bantustan
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Bantustans played a central role in the South African apartheid government and are therefore important for African politics as a whole.

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?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise - it summarizes well points that are brought up in other parts of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, definitely.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The article ends in 1989, which is when bantustans are abolished, so the article is up-to-date based on the topic timeline.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * No - there is a banner stating that the neutrality of the article is disputed.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The talk page largely discussed the "Usage in non-South African contexts" section, which states (controversially) that the term "bantustan" has been used in Israel, Sri Lanka and other contexts. So potentially it is biased, but that's unclear.
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, to the time period.
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I saw
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * 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 conversations are mainly about the use of the term "bantustan" in places beyond South Africa
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It has a C-Class rating.
 * It is part of 5 WikiProjects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't discussed this yet in class, but Wikipedia has focused much more on small details that we wouldn't be able to cover in lecture.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is well-written but needs further work to contextualize and strengthen the points.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It provides crucial details and summarizes important events.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Further contextualization.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article requires further development.

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: