User:.dognoise/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?

African reggae

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

There are a handful of musical genres to choose from; however I figured African reggae music could be a popular genre, and the Talk page confirmed this. I searched the library database and Google Books for "African reggae" and received a myriad of sources to choose from, so I think it's a good starting point given how the main article is a stub and not broad for supposedly covering African reggae--it only covers Ivory Coast, South Africa, and Nigeria. Additionally, it only has three sub-headings for artists within these genres (all other musicians are listed out, and organization could be reworked on the page. The Reggae WikiProject deems this article of "top importance" and it can definitely be expanded upon.

Evaluate the article

I do not think the lead section of this article sets up the appropriate tone for the brief introduction, overview, and summary of African reggae. The very first sentence immediately ties the genre back to Jamaica reggae which is not a bad thing whatsoever, but including the sentence as an introductory sentence can diminish and downplay the actual subject, and there are a lot of distinctive features between African reggae and Jamaica reggae. I believe the lead section could be revised to introduce: what exactly is African reggae and what is its importance and influence; and the list of artists in the lead section, because this motif gets repeated so often after the lead section, establishing a heading specifically for artists could be a possible solution to facilitate organization. The lead section lacks what the headings and subsequent sections describe, and it can be expanded to at least two to three paragraphs.

The article's content is relevant, but extremely lacking for as broad as the article is. It only spans three geographical regions for a musical genre that is more widespread than the article shows. And if you take the Reggae in South Africa section, the first sentence refers to Jamaican musicians releasing and performing music regarding South Africa's political environment. There's no mention of *inside* South African influence aside from the long list of artists at the end of the paragraph. As far as Tone and Balance go, the article's speech sounds neutral but it under-represents a lot of reggae in African countries that are not listed because there's so little content (and it's a stub article).

It is imperative that additional sources are established within this article mainly due to the amount of content that would need to be added to include a diverse and broad range of African reggae. The sources given are helpful for research and do work, but there are some that need to be replaced; for example, the referenced YouTube video should be taken out and replaced with a scholarly article or journal, preferably. In reference to the Organization & Writing Quality the article, again, can be reorganized into broader sections utilizing sub-headings as well. The writing quality can improve as well, shifting to a focus on African reggae instead of reinforcing the connection to Jamaica reggae (although this is important, and I can suggest including a section on Jamaican influence possibly within the history section, or the following section.

The article has no images which is something that should be changed and another reason why I chose it, as other articles included images to musicians within the article's topic. The talk page does not have much discussion aside from someone informing us that the African reggae article used to be three sentences long, so it's definitely an update from that! It was part of three WikiProjects and of top importance in one of them. Overall, the article is still a stub article and needs work. It's a great starting point with the myriad of sources to branch off from, but it detrimentally does not have enough content to sufficiently describe the African reggae music genre. In terms of completeness, it is a severely under-developed article that needs to broaden its representation and focus.