User:Breano21/Evaluate an Article

Article Evaluation

• Senicide: Senicide
• Senicide is a topic I have some preexisting knowledge. Additionally, I have an interest in editing the article in the future.

Lead

The lead is lacking. It gives a definition of senicide, but no information about the article structure or information presented.

Lead evaluation

Stub

Content

Article content is up-to-date and mostly relevant, but needs expansion. Philosophical and religious views sections are very narrow considering the global reach of the topic shown in the cultural section. Additionally, the historical section does not inform the reader of anything more than what they could assume. The culture section does inform readers about underrepresented groups and is more fleshed out, but would benefit from additional work. The senicide in fiction section is not relevant. I believe it would be better placed in another article.

Content evaluation

C

Tone and Balance

Article's tone is neutral, but is heavily imbalanced. Article focuses on Western views with almost nothing on Eastern or South American views. Overall, more content needs to be added to all viewpoints.

Tone and balance evaluation

C

Sources and References

Article needs more diverse sources. Some facts were not cited and several sources did not have working links. In addition to more sources, more diverse sources are needed. Additionally, article has a source from publisher of questionable reputation. The information presented in the source was accurate, but needs a second source to collaborate it.

Sources and references evaluation

C

Organization

Guiding questions

Article sections could be reworked. Currently, philosophical views and religious views are broken up, but I believe they could be one section. Additionally, within sections, the article does not flow well. At times, it is difficult to understand the jump from one sentence to another.

Organization evaluation

C

Images and Media

Article does not have any images or media.

Images and media evaluation

Stub

Checking the talk page

Talk page includes major edit, but no suggestion for future improvements. This is in spite of the article being a part of several WikiProjects, all rating the article as class C.

Talk page evaluation

C

Overall impressions

The article is currently rated at a C and appropriately so. While the article provides a short overview of senicide in many cultures, it lacks depth. It could be improved by adding more cultural and religious viewpoints on senicide. Additionally, the history section may benefit from information on the development of senicide in history. Outside of content, the structure and sources need to be more closely looked at. Overall, the article needs work, but has a solid foundation.

Overall evaluation

C

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: Talk:Senicide