User:TreaBunny/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Adam and Eve

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I wanted to see how other Wikipedia users have written about Adam and Eve and what sources they used to get this information. These are also important figures to look at in terms of gender roles in the Old Testament so seeing how they are talked about and the different perspectives that are presented is interesting.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:


 * 1) The lead does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes Adam and Eve.
 * 2) The lead does a brief description of the article's major sections, including links that bring you to other Wikipedia articles that match the sections
 * 3) The lead does not include information that is not in the rest of the article.
 * 4) The lead appears to be concise and not overly detailed.

Content:


 * 1) The article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * 2) For the article being about two figures from historical texts it does seem up to date, with people who have made edits on the same day I am viewing it.
 * 3) There does not seem to be any content that is missing or content that does not belong.
 * 4) The article may deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, featuring sections on Judaism, Gnostics, and Islam which may be historically underrepresented populations.

Tone and Balance:


 * 1) This article is neutral.
 * 2) I do not see any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * 3) The article does feature a lot of references to Genesis and the Hebrew Bible but there are also mentions of other Abrahamic religions and religious texts throughout the text, covering a wide rang of viewpoints.
 * 4) Of the minority or fringe viewpoints I see, not many are accurately described that way with some not referencing who had these interpretations and if they were a part of the majority or not.
 * 5) The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References:


 * 1) It seems that all facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.
 * 2) The sources are thorough and reflect a wide range of the available literature on Adam and Eve.
 * 3) Some of the sources are current, with the earliest source coming from 2022, while others a historical references dating back to 1876 and 1908.
 * 4) The sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors that do seem to include historically marginalized individuals when possible.
 * 5) I would say that there aren't many sources that would be better than the ones already listed. Most seem to come from peer-reviewed articles or books that cover the subject matter.
 * 6) I checked roughly ten links and only one did not work.

Organization and Writing Quality:


 * 1) This article is well written by being concise, clear, and easy to read.
 * 2) After going through the article two times I could not find any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * 3) The article is very well-organized with the sections matching the order they were presented in the lead section and covering all the major points with this topic.

Images and Media:


 * 1) The article does include images that enhance understanding of the topic.
 * 2) All of the images presented are well-captioned.
 * 3) It appears that all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * 4) The images are laid out in a visually appealing way, helping to break up text when necessary and providing context to sections with visual aid.

Talk Page Discussion:


 * 1) There are a lot of conversations over the article using the word "Myth" to describe the story of Adam and Eve and other scripture written within the bible. Some argue that the word myth should not be allowed as it has negative connotation towards a religious group because it claims that their creation stories are nothing but myth. Other Wikipedia users talk about how this is actually neutral language due to the definition of myth and how it is used consistently with all religious mythology.
 * 2) The Adam and Eve article has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Philosophy and has been rated C-Class by WikiProject Vital Articles.
 * 3) Wikipedia mentions a lot of similar things we did in class about the different creation stories in Genesis and interpretations that see Adam as a hermaphrodite before Eve is split from him, but this article does not include our discussions on the gender roles that are presented through Adam and Eve.

Overall Impressions:


 * 1) The article's overall status is good, there seems to have been a lot of research into secondary sources to cover the main points of this topic and even go into various viewpoints from different Abrahamic religions.
 * 2) The major strength of this article is the organization. It seems as though everything was well thought out before being added and has a clear place and order of being presented. Another strength is the variety of sources, not only does this article include the actual historical texts that the information was drawn from, but other secondary sources that talk about the interpretations of information surrounding Adam and Eve. Lastly, this article is written with a very neutral tone and is easy to read so that anyone could look up the article and understand the information being presented.
 * 3) The one way I would say this article can be improved is by cutting some of the information that gets repeated throughout the sections. The article talks about how Adam and Even betrayed God by eating the fruit of knowledge because they were persuaded by the serpent multiple times throughout several of the sections, just with some being more detailed than the others. Rather than repeating this multiple times I feel as though it may be helpful to state this information once in a section dedicated to it.
 * 4) This article is well developed and seems complete, offering the right amount of information about the topic without straying from the major points that need to be included.