User:Turtlegirl33/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Statute

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because it is related to the course themes of POLI SCI 400: Global Politics of Policing, in which I am currently enrolled through UW-Madison. This article, which explains the term "Statute," interested me because I do not have a thorough understanding of the word, though I have heard it used in the news, film, and social media posts I consume. I found the article by first conducting a database search of "Policing and Security" on the WikiProjects page, selecting the WikiProject Law Enforcement site, and exploring the site's Requested Articles page. The article is being used by the WikiProject as a hyperlink to establish definitions of "Statutory" and it matters because statutory law and offenses are the basis through which policing operates. I wanted to find an article that elaborates on the first module of the class that I am currently working through, which considers police brutality and the BLM movement. Understanding this article on what statutes are and how they come into action has helped me contextualize how American statutes have lent themselves to unequal rates of violent policing incidents in marginalized areas. My preliminary impression of the article is that it appears to be edited thoroughly as it includes WikiLinks, citations, and the use of bolding to make the topic clear.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section

The article does provide a concise introductory sentence that describes the topic in the format of an encyclopedia, rather than a dictionary. The brief description does not provide an overview of the sections of the article, but the sections themselves are logically decided and provide further relevant information on the topic. The lead is clear and easy to follow, with short sentences and simple language. It does touch on information that is not discussed later in the article; however, it is illustrated with an image. To be more specific, the last sentence of the lead provides information on the Latin roots of the word, which is relevant to the definition, but not to the application, There is an image next to that sentence of a physical copy of a historical statute of Lithuania, which was originally written in Polish. The Latin roots/historical examples are not revisited later. The lead is overall concise and provides the right amount of detail, though the "Alternative meanings" section could be flushed out with more contemporary examples.

Content

The article's content is relevant to the topic, with up-to-date information on applications of statutes in international affairs (examples provided about the happenings around the European Central Bank, International Court of Justice, and autonomous communities of Spain). Since the topic of the article deals with historic themes (constitutional writing and nation-based lawmaking), there is not as much recent information as other articles could/should have. One piece of content that does not belong in its section is the last sentence of the "Alternative meanings: International Law," which does not flow with the sentences prior and does not mirror the central theme of the section. Since this sentence also mimics the information provided in the lead about linguistic roots and historical uses of the word, it could be moved up to the lead. The article does not deal with a Wikipedia equity gap or explicitly shed light on a specific underrepresented issue, though it does address address a nuanced idea of the "universal problem encountered by lawmakers" of how to organize statutes.

Tone and Balance

A neutral tone is consistent throughout and no biased claims were found. These viewpoints are neither under nor overrepresented. That being said, the article topic is not necessarily one that is taught across primary public American institutions, so the article was helpful in clarifying the term "statute" in a way that everyone can understand. There were not any minority/fringe viewpoints or persuasive tones.

Sources and References

Facts presented in the article were partially backed up. The introductory sentence contained a credible but not notable source (a dictionary) to back up the definition, but other facts were left un-cited. For example, the last sentence of the article begins to explain autonomy statutes through a two-sentence case study of the Spanish constitution, but no sources were cited so credibility is in question for that section. The other source cited was the Encyclopedia Brittanica, which did have a working hyperlink as well as a current status, No paraphrasing plagiarism was found, but the article definitely needs a diverse set of peer-reviewed and verifiable sources. There was not a spectrum of authors or even any sources that could be replaced with better ones. Some high-quality sources I found are: a reflection and summary of The Rome Statute, which could add to the lead section as well as the discussion on historical derivations/definitions of the term; an overview on the Statute of the International Criminal Court, which could strengthen the "International Law" section; and two peer-reviewed studies on statutes on religious-based food imports in Indonesia and statutes on building sustainable cities in Brazil, which could both speak to the "Autonomy statute" section while offering coverage on underrepresented issues.

Organizing and Writing Quality

Despite some of the shortcomings, this article was well-written, with neutrality and a factual tone consistent through the sections. No grammatical errors were found and the organization of the subsections made sense in the way that it broke down the topic.

Images and Media

The singular image on this article's page was well-captioned and visually appealing. The source listed under the image details summary is "Own work" by author/User Wojsyl from 2005. If it was not stolen from a copyrighted book and taken as a photo from a museum or other public domain then it does adhere to the copyright regulations. The image does enhance understanding of the topic because it provides an examples of a physical written statute and suggests what similar examples from other countries might look like in person.

Talk Page Discussion

The discussions on the article's Talk page are a bit tense, with users going back and forth about why certain deleted edits are "absolute nonsense" and "hopelessly confused." I was surprised to see the level of contention on these user discussions - it definitely adds pressure and hesitation to add edits to people's work. There were moves to add a "Civil Disobedience" section, which interested me because that is the topic I was looking towards after reading it and it holds relevance to this course. The responses to that edit were critical of the contributing user's lack of focus on the central theme, as well as debates around the ideology of statutory offenses warranting government infringement on civil liberties. There was also a point made (later deleted) to make the distinction between statutes and laws, which I thought would have been important and helpful, if reworded and re-added. The article is a part of the WikiProject "Law Enforcement." Since the topic of the article is related to public policy, constitutionalism/democracy, and the antiquated lawmaking system that governs our everyday lives, it makes sense that there is so much heated disagreement on the Talk page.

Overall Impressions

The article's status is "level-4 vital article" and rated Start-class on the content assessment scale. The Talk page banners also showed that it is Top-importance to the "Law" and Mid-importance to the "Politics" WikiProjects. The strengths are its neutrality and conciseness. Clearly, a lot of users have contributed time and effort to the Talk page and are trying to focus the article on the subjective central importance of the term. I believe that this article could both hone in on the most important themes while adding more information about contemporary uses of the term, implications of statues on modern life, and cross-referencing national and international examples of statutes. It is certainly underdeveloped, despite the hefty amount of behind-the-scenes submissions on the Talk page, but it serves its purpose as a partially-complete article for the masses who are probably just reading the lead sentence to get a quick understanding of the term.