User:Cferg33/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]The article on David Kaplan's 1997 film "Little Red Riding Hood".
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]This is a film our entire class watched when reading the different versions of the story, so our teacher requested that we evaluate it.
Evaluate the article
[edit]Lead: The lead section does include a topic sentence that clearly describes what the article is/about. It doesn't include any main points of the story just who wrote it and the main actress. The lead over all is very concise and introduces the article well.
Content: The content of this article is relevant and up to date. Where as everything that is said in the article is accurate and does happen in the film, I feel as though the content itself is lack luster and could maybe go in depth about certain topics a little more than just mentioning it.
Tone and Balance: This article is from a neutral point of view and there is no evidence of bias. This article is very much strictly informative, there is no arguing sides or even sides present. The article just lays out the film in a describing way without any persuasion.
Sources and References: I would say that the sources are reliable, accurate, and current. The sources themselves are not very diverse, they mostly come from IMDB sources but it does reference the different versions of the story "Little Red Riding Hood" that have extensive authors. The links do work, so you are able to access the sources used to look at them.
Organizing and Writing Quality: This article is very clear and easy to read, it is easy to follow and well organized. It gives the information in a direct manner and you don't have to go looking ir digging into anything to find what you need.
Images and Media: The only image included in the article is the Film Poster. This image is in the kind of the overview section on the far right that includes just the basic information about the film like director, cast, etc.
Talk Page Discussion: Most of the discussion on the talk pages is from our class and previous classes, and most of it consists of questions about the movie or the outlining in the article, some include suggestions on what to add or how to make the article better and more in depth. This conversation is very similar to the conversations we have in class about it, everyone just says what they think and others will go around and help and answer each other.
Overall Impressions: I would assess this article as just developed. This article does a good job at just getting to the point and being direct, all of the information is accurate and it explains pretty much every part of the film. However, it is very short and I believe it can go into more details about the meaning behind the story and maybe into the creative decisions that the director and crew made and why they did certain things certain ways. Overall the article is accurate but could use more gumption.