User:Tdavis47/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.


 * Mathematics and Architecture: (Link)
 * This article relates to the class that I'm taking (History of Architecture) which includes this Wikipedia page as an assignment. It also relates to the content we've discussed - Greek architecture displayed a fairly sophisticated understanding of mathematics.

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
The Lead does include an introduction, though it takes up a whole paragraph. The Lead also introduces individual sections, fairly well balanced. It does not appear to introduce unique information that isn't in the article. I doubt it should be more concise, as it thoroughly introduces all sections of the article well.

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?

Content evaluation

 * The article seems well-put-together, relevant, and up-to-date. There is scant information about buildings' environmental goals - modern energy modeling may be related to this topic. Some paragraphs lack immediate mathematical information, but this could easily be modified.

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
The article seems more or less neutral, though the historical background justifying the connection between architecture and mathematics may be read as justifying the article's existence. Other than that, no one viewpoint is overrepresented, as non-mathematical architectural decisions are also included in context. Few judgement claims are made as to whether mathematically-designed buildings are more appealing than others, etc - the ones that are can easily be modified.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Some paragraphs are drawn from only one source, though the sources are all reliable and neutral, as far as I can tell. No [citation needed] links show up. Links are not broken!

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
The organization of the paper is a little arbitrary - secular and religious reasons are split, which is acceptable. No grammatical or organizational errors were immediately seen.

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
Images and media are not lacking and relate fairly well to the surrounding articles. Media is sourced well and does not detract from the readability of the article.

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
This article was under GA review, which helped in its nomination for the Mathematics, Visual Arts, and Philosophy WikiProjects. The bulk of the talk page was concluded suggestions, already implemented in the article.

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 article is fairly well-written, though a few changes could be made. Some elements lack a discussion of the mathematics of various buildings - room for improvement there.

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:

I may be talking about adding more to the 'environmental goals' section later, but have not done so at this time.