User:TheWookieWikster/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: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.I tried to look at Middle Earth, but there were like a thousand articles and this was one I was interested in that was easy to find and contribute to.

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? Kind of, but it mostly gives generic info about the book.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?It includes epic fantasy
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?It is fairly concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is a link/source missing for the Ignotus Award. There are a few sources and info missing.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?Yes.
 * 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?No.For instance, Azor Ahai, Harrenhal, House Tully, House Lanister, Hand of the King, and a few others do not have links.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?Yes, for the most part.
 * Are the sources current?Yes.
 * 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 too many. Nothing major.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?Yes. It is well organized in terms of catagories of information that someone would want to find about the book. The plot summary is very good for anyone who forgot or is just looking for a quick recap.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?It only has one image, the cover of the book, and it's good, but I think it could use more images.
 * Are images well-captioned?Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?Yes, as far as I know.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?The image that is there is visually appealing.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?There are a lot of conversations about the plot of the story and what sources to use vs which ones not to use, as well as some conversation on if something is copyright or under Fair Use.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?It is C-Listed
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?Not much, but it is unbiased and has a ton of sources, though the Talk page has a lot of informality to it.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?C-Listed 4/5
 * What are the article's strengths?It is unbiased, clear, and presents a lot of good information about the book.
 * How can the article be improved?Add more sources and give a little more description.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?It is fairly well developed.

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: