User:Ajlappenbusch/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: [Clone High]
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: It's a series I personally enjoy and I hope that my evaluation makes its page stronger and more accessible
Lead
[edit]- 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 (contents table)
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- no
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- Could perhaps be a bit more concise, but overall pretty solid.
Lead evaluation
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes
- Is the content up-to-date?
- Yes! Some really new info about the reboot has already been added
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- The controversey section kind of fails to give credence to Indian dissatisfaction with how Gandhi was portrayed, possibly due to a lack of information available. We know that there was outrage, but it could have been helpful to include specific scenes with episode numbers of where offensive depictions occurred.
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
- Not really, unless you want to count the less than ideal depiction of gay characters on the show.
Content evaluation
[edit]Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article neutral?
- Clearly written by fans, but still manages to stay relatively nuetral
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- They mention Clone High's 'cult following' but they don't really have evidence to support that claim. They link to the article on a cult following which is great, but it would be nice to see some article acknwledging the fanbase cited there.
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Not particularly, most are based directly on the show's episodes.
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- It may lean them toward liking the show, but the show's content is also largely appealing so I can't say I find that to be an issue of neutrality.
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Mostly yes, some appear to not be but only due to a lack of reliable sourcing for this info (e.g. having a cult following)
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes certainly.
- Are the sources current?
- Yes where relevant
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Not really but it's also not a well covered topic
- Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- No
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes
Organization evaluation
[edit]Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Yes
- Are images well-captioned?
- yes
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Under fair use they should be fine, however the talk page has pointed out the fair use is a bit questionable
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- There could be more, or larger, but it's fine
Images and media evaluation
[edit]Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- LOTS! There have been a ton of cool edits made since inception, and some nice action items to work on such as the 'controversy' section
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- C-level article, not that I could find
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- We have not talked about it in class.
Talk page evaluation
[edit]Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status?
- I think it's good! Just not super well researched as it's more of a pop culture phenomenon
- What are the article's strengths?
- The way it adheres to the shows canon, the in depth descriptions of each episode, the character list
- How can the article be improved?
- more sources for some statements (if possible) regarding followings and controversies.
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- Well developed, especially for the content matter
Overall evaluation
[edit]Optional activity
[edit]- 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: