User:Professortitan/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.
- Underdark: Underdark
- It is one of my favorite settings in the world of the Forgotten Realms and the more accurate the information, the easier it is to successfully incorporate it into your own game.
Lead[edit]
- Guiding questions
- It introduces the Underdark and the role it plays in Dungeons and Dragons.
- It does not provide a description of the major sections. It just describes it in more detail instead.
- It includes a quote from Polygon that establishes it as a well-known setting. This is not featured elsewhere and seems out of place.
- Because of the extra Polygon quote, it seems like it is using it to justify the need for the page itself. It isn't needed.
Lead evaluation[edit]
Content[edit]
- Guiding questions
- It repeats information from different sources referring to the popularity of the setting. This seems unnecessary.
- The Underdark has been used as recently as 5th Edition, but it does not mention this.
- 5th Edition released an adventure module that released a lot of new information about running a game in this current edition.
Tone and Balance[edit]
- Guiding questions
- It does seem neutral in tone.
- It doesn't leave much room for bias, but it is sparse in detail.
- The information provided is often repetitive and unnecessary.
- It does not try to sway the reader.
Tone and balance evaluation[edit]
Sources and References[edit]
- Guiding questions
- They have sources throughout, but they don't always seem relevant.
- There is a lot more that could be said about the subject, but the most descriptive sections have the least amount of sources.
- The sources are not current. They are at least nine years old.
- The links work.
Sources and references evaluation[edit]
Organization[edit]
- Guiding questions
- It has great sections, especially the Features section, but not all of them are of the same quality.
- I didn't notice any, but that doesn't mean that it is free from them.
- It could be organized better. It needs more detail. There is a lot more to the Underdark than what is presented.
Organization evaluation[edit]
Images and Media[edit]
- Guiding questions
- No images. It is under copyright by Wizards of the Coast.
- See above.
- The fact that it doesn't have any images means that it is conforming to the regulations.
- See above.
Images and media evaluation[edit]
Checking the talk page[edit]
- Guiding questions
- They are talking about the existence of the Underdark in several different fantasy settings in D&D and whether or not it needs to be expanded upon to include the different levels. It hasn't been updated in a very long time.
- It has a C-Class rating and is part of the Dungeons & Dragons WikiProject. It has also been labelled as being of mid-importance.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Talk page evaluation[edit]
Overall impressions[edit]
- Guiding questions
- It's pretty sparse and isn't updated regularly.
- The features section is very informative and provides the most useful information.
- More citations and updated information from the newer editions would be helpful.
- It is underdeveloped and could use some renewed interest to flesh it out. They call it one of the most important locations in the all of D&D, so it should be given more importance.
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: