User:AydenGenther/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

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? (It shouldn't.)
Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

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?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

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?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

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

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?

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.

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

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?

Examples of good feedback

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?

Dark Souls (video game)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I chose this article to evaluate because I am a big fan of the Dark Souls series and I have played all of them multiple times.

Evaluate the article

Lead Section:

The lead section is strong. It includes a good summary and overview of what Dark Souls and also gives a small glimpse of the lore pf the game, as well as its success and popularity. The claims do not seem biased at all, there is one claim that says it has been cited as the greatest video game of all time, which is backed up by a citation. The lead is concise and to the point, but it does contain some details that aren't technically necessary, but do not takeaway from the quality of the article.

Content:

The content of this article is detailed, up-to-date, and overall interesting. It talks about core gameplay features such as the bonfire mechanic, the combat style of the game, as well as the dark fantasy aesthetic that the game uses to build a massive, interconnected and twisted world. The article also talks about the multiplayer features, NPCs, the plot of the game, etc. The rest of the content includes the development of the game, the rewards it has received. the marketing of the game, as well as the overall reception of it.

Tone and Balance:

The overall tone of the article is fine, there isn't any bias information be provided and almost everything is backed by sources.

Sources and References:

The articles contains 118 sources, and almost everything is backed up by a source within the article. I checked a few of the sources and they seemed legit. There might be better sources but the sources that were used are good enough for the completion of a great article.

Talk Page Discussion:

The talk page discussion didn't have much to offer. There were only about 5 events and the first on was from 2011 and the most recent one was 2022. The conversations included the articles rating, nomination to delete the article, and to change the name of the article. The discussions were a little less professional than ones we have in the school discussions.

Overall Impressions:

My overall impressions of this article is that it is pretty good. It could be a lit larger but I believe there is a Dark Souls Wiki that people post on so it makes sense why there wasn't a lot of time and energy put into this article. The article has good information, uses great citations to backup its work, an unbiased viewpoint on the game as well as pictures to keep user engage.