User:ZW12003/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: Fandom culture in South Korea
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I picked this article because it is related to my capstone project. It is an article that is in its developing stages and could use a lot of work so i decided to evaluate this article in hopes of providing feedback for improvement.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * The lead of this article is too simplified. It does not provide an overview of the article's topic and is very vague and short. The lead lists the articles major sections, but does not provide a description of the sections and is not inclusive of all topics discussed in the article. Overall, the lead of this article is poorly written and poorly cited.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * The content of the article is relevant to the topic, but the information provided seems a bit outdated. Much of the current K-pop fan practices happen online, but there is no mention about online fandom in the article. Overall, there are many topics about Korean Fandom practices that are missing from the article such as fan practices, platforms, global and local impact etc.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions
 * The tone of the article is quite neutral and does not appear to be biased, but there are viewpoints that are overrepresented, such as the positives to fan behaviour.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * There are many claims in the article that are not backed by secondary sources. As well, majority of sources are from news articles and the reference list lacks work from academic sources.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * The structure of the article is clear and well organized. Some work on sentence structure could be done to improve flow.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * The article lacks images. The only image that is in the article is not related to the topic of the article.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions
 * The talk page is lacking in contributions. There are some suggestions on how to improve the article, but it seems that there is very little discussion on how it can be edited and improved.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * The article overall needs a lot of work, It seems that this article was created by one person and has not been worked on since. There are many things that need to be improved about the article such as inclusion of more information and citations.


 * 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?

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: