User:Yuzhan Yuzhan/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: Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I like this anime.

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? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Lead concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? I think it 's related because it's japanese pop culture.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes. It's updated
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, everything is well-constructed. But there is not enough information for a lot of characters. There are only a little main characters' background information.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, it's all neutral facts.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, these are all neutral descriptive.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, they reflect the available literature on the topic.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, it's updated to current time.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? I check 4 of them, it all works.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, i think it s very concie and easy to read. The lead and guildline is well-constructed.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I don't fine any grammatical errors after reading half page.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It's well-orgranized.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No, it doesn't include some images for us to understand this topic.
 * Are images well-captioned? Not enough images.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Not enough images information.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No, they are not.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? I think there are lack of character information. There are only the main content of this anime. It's supposed to add lots of character information.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is related to WikiProjects of Anime and Manga.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It's updated but not enough information, compare to other websites.
 * What are the article's strengths? It's brief and clear to declare the main point but lack of details and main information.
 * How can the article be improved? It can add main characters' information and background. It can upload lots of pictures to attract reader.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Poor developed. It is very concise and short. There are a lot of basic information that is not mentioned.

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: