User:Yawen Liu usc/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: WikiProject Visual arts, Visual arts
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I am interested in visual art topics, thus I chose this WikiProject page to evaluate.

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 WiKiProject page states that the page is a platform for Wikipedians to organize information about virtual art. With a clear overview of the contents and provides links direct to the major sections of the WikiProject page. Besides the information in the article, the article also includes a brief instructions for new participants to learn how to edit the page, in addition to the information it presents, because the WikiProject page focus on collaborations between Wikipedians. The Lead is concise enough as a brief introduction, which is easy to understand. Overall, the Lead suggests clear structure of the Wikipedia page and provides a comprehensive overview of the contents the article covers.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

Yes, the article's contents match my exceptation of the page.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

Yes, the content is up-to-date. The most recent edit was on 18 Jun, 2020, which was two days ago.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

No. The article covers all topics it needs.

Content evaluation
The contents of the page is relevant to the article, providing good instructions for the participants to edit the Wikipedia page of the virtual art topic. The structure and the information presented are well balanced, giving enough part for new participants to undertand the page. The contents is up-to-date, and record all new edits the Wikipedians have. To improve the contents, the article can add more to the drawing section that lacks further illustration on details.

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 has a overall neutral tone, all the contents are presented without bias. The article does not have perferences toward particular positions, which aims to present comprehensive information for the readers. Including vary styles of art and art history, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of any sides.

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
Yes, the facts in te article are supported by valid history and background sources, such as published books, science articles, and government pages. All the sources are reliable, valid and avaliable. The information used in the article is well cited and organized in the references section. A few older sources are used due to the long-standing history virtual art has; as a result, some old published works are used to enhance reader's comprehension.

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
Yes, the article is concise enough to read, with clear organization with each sections. The article does not have obvious grammatical or spelling errors. The organization of the article not only provide strong visual effects with clear seperations of the contents, it also balance the weights of important viewpoints and contents.

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
The article include essential images as example to the contents. All the images are captioned with correct format and valid sources; and all adhere to the Wikipedia's copyright regulations. The visuals are organized on both sides of the page, enables a visual balance as the reader view from the top to the bottom of the page. One or two images can be added to the drawing sections to balance the overall organization.

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
The talk page is not up-to-date with the most recent edit happened in 2017. This could be a result that the virual art wikipedia page as an associated WikiProject page, WikiProject Visual arts, that helps the participants to better edit the article. The article is rated as C-Class article and has a level-2 vital article in the section of Art. The Wikipedia discuesses the topic with a clear timeline, giving the time stamps of when, who, and how the article was edited in the WikiProject page. Although the article is marked as low importance C-Class article, the article is overall well-written. The Wikipedia article includes more details compare to in-class instructions, which serves as a good introduction for beginer to undertsand the topic.

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 overall well-written with supports and consice information. The organization is clear with subtopics and all contents are equally weighed in the article. Therefore, the article includes main stream art styles and history, providing a strong overview for visual art. The article can be improved by adding more non-mainstream art styles.

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: