User:Joyy.c/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]Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]I chose to evaluate this article because my group has decided to contribute to it for our Wiki project, and I think taking the time to evaluate what is already there (or not there) will help guide us in considering what might need to be added or edited in the current article. It is an important topic to contribute to because the issue is (unfortunately) becoming relevant again, and we discussed that although some people may be vaguely familiar with the concept, for many of us, we were unaware of the exact term "race suicide" until we heard about it in this class.
My first impression of the article was that in comparison to its importance and relevance, it was extremely short. I expected to find more information, especially in terms of more recent news and its connection to racism and eugenics, but I was surprised to see how little was actually said in the article and also how despite the fact that the "categories" section at the bottom mentions anti-black racism in the United States, the article itself does not refer to it even a single time.
Evaluate the article
[edit]Lead section
[edit]It is difficult to evaluate the "lead section" because there is no lead section, but rather, the article is a very short, single section. Just looking at the first paragraph, however, the introduction explains the overall concept, but there is a heavy emphasis on being Protestant or Catholic, and it does not mention Black individuals and related racism, which appears to be a major part of the topic.
Content; Tone and Balance
[edit]Although the article itself is very short to begin with, the overwhelming majority of what is there discusses what individuals have said about the issue, rather than examples of the issue itself. The last edit was made a few months ago, but it seems like in comparison to many events that could be discussed, there is very little being shared about connections with current events. It does not mention Black individuals at all, which is very alarming, considering the extensive history of racism against Black individuals in the United States. The overall tone is relatively neutral, but in general there is too little content to accurately gauge.
Sources and References
[edit]Overall, sources are well cited and come from reliable places. The links work properly and are accurate. However, many of them are outdated, with many being over a century old, and the most recent reference is from 2018, which was six years ago. When considering recent events relevant to racism and this topic, it seems that there is a lot missing.
Organization and writing quality
[edit]The writing is clear and the sections are broken up in a way that makes sense to read. There are no grammar or spelling errors, and there is nothing else notable to be flagged.
Images and Media
[edit]There is one image at the top, and the caption explains the image well, while also citing the source it was retrieved from. The image is relevant, but like the rest of the article, it seems that there may be better images to have included, perhaps in addition to this one, to encapsulate the overarching concept better, rather than a related mentioning of the topic.
Talk page discussion
[edit]Just like the shortness of the article itself, there is little talk going on about the article in general. Some of the conversations question the accuracy of the information in the article, suggesting that it may not be correct. The article is part of many different WikiProjects, including Discrimination, History of Science, and Sociology, so it is surprising to see how little discussion is going on about it.
Overall impressions
[edit]Overall, a lot has to be added to the article. As of now, it explains very little and has nearly no examples connecting it to current events, and a lot of the information is from a long time ago. Before even considering ways to improve the article, I think first steps include simply making sure more information is included to encapsulate the bigger picture regarding the concept and how it is relevant to our society today.