User:Eco144/Evaluate an Article
 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA 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.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia 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.
Sources and ReferencesA 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.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe 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.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA 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. |
Which article are you evaluating?
[edit]I am evaluating the article on Aesop's Fables (film series).
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]I am familiar with Aesop's fables in terms of it be a collection of short stories with a moral, but I had never heard of the film series before. I was curious about how the film series would compare to the actual short stories and whether it was an animated version of the fables.
The article is important to those who are studying the history of animation especially during the silent era which this was produced in. It is an interesting piece of film history which would be valuable to those who are hoping to emulate or teach this topic.
At first glance, the article seems to be a short and quick read. There is enough basic information that everyone who reads it can glean an understanding of what the film series was about. Surprisingly, for an animated series, there was only one piece of media.
Evaluate the article
[edit]Lead section
The introductory sentence clearly explains what Aesop's Fables (film series) is and who it is created by. The introduction does not include a brief description of the major sections in the article. The introduction should include some background information about the era of animation because it seems to assume that the reader has a frame of reference for what the time period it was produced in relates to the substance of the series. The introduction is concise but is lacking some background information and clarification as to how the series parts relates to the whole.
Content
The content of the article is relevant to the topic, but there seem to be some gaps in knowledge about the creator's and other staffer's opinions on the series as well as the transition to using sound. I don't think the article mentions that the film series was originally silent which is an integral part of the series' history.
Tone and Balance
The article is neutral and does not try to sway the reader towards a particular position.
Sources and References
Some citations are missing to important reported facts such as the quotes. The citations are from a good variety of sources including published books, essays, and encyclopedias. The sources are written by different people. However, they do not include a historically under-represented authors though I am not sure how this would enhance the article. The links are accessible.
Organization and writing quality
The article follows chronological order in order to describe how the film series evolved and changed over time. I believe that it helps the reader gain a clearer understanding of the topic. The writing quality is consistent throughout the article. It is easy to read and comprehend. However, further development of sections on major characters of the series or the different parts could lend a better understanding of the topic.
Images and Media
For an article about an animated film series, there is only one picture excluding the introductory picture. The image is well-captioned and could be positioned better, perhaps in a section that includes the part it is taken from.
Talk Page Discussion
Currently, there is no discussion on the Talks page.
Overall Impressions
I agree with Wikipedia's rating of C on this article. It has a great start and there is definitely room for improvement. The article's strengths are in how the idea was conceived by the author. Developing different sections as to how the show was produced, cast members, different episodes, and recurring themes or ideas would be beneficial. Including a section about the animation style and any changes that occurred after the addition of sound would be an improvement as well. All in all, the article is under-developed and can be improved significantly.