User:Davidpizzarello12/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?

Winx Club

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I decided to choose this article because of my interest in the Italian TV show, Winx Club. Because of the many dubs and versions of the show, character names and plot points can differ in regards to the source material. My first impression was that the article is component in describing the tv show but does not have enough information describing the dubs and cultural phenomena that the show created in pop culture.

Evaluate the article

The opening sentence of the article states that Winx Club is "an animated television series co-produced by Rainbow SpA and later Nickelodeon". The sentence does not mention that it is a fantasy, or that Winx Club is a franchise that includes a television show, toys, games, comics, and a live action adaptation. The article is clear and concise with modern sources, however is rather brief when discussing the plot of the series and should delve into the main concepts of friendship, magic, and villains that each season of the show revolves around. The article also doesn't talk much about the fashion of the show, which is one of the most memorable and defining aspects of it. Multiple Italian fashion brands helped design clothes for the show, which is also not mentioned in the article. The article also has a small section about the 2025 reboot of Winx Club that is now outdated as more information has been revealed about the upcoming new Winx Club. The images are correctly captioned and relevant to the article, and are current. The talk section of the article is discussing the inclusion of different dub voice casts and the importance of highlighting the difference between the Italian and English versions of the show. The talk session also has some discussion about the reboot inclusion, and if this new 2025 series requires a new Wikipedia article for it.