User:MathDementor/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 this article because I wanted to choose something I already have some familiarity with and that is related to the law. I wanted something familiar so that I could focus on the exercise of evaluating it rather than 'getting distracted' by learning something new. My preliminary impression is that the article is well-written and researched. The article has several sections presented in a logical with links, footnotes, and images.
Evaluate the article
[edit]Lead Section
The first paragraph contains a concise description and overview of the Code of Hammurabi. The following paragraphs of the lead section provide details on the discovery of the stele as well as a detailed physical description of the stele. The lead section continues with a general description of the subject matter of the Code and information about where replicas of the stele can be found.
Content
The article contains extensive background information that roots the Code in history and connects it with other law collections of the time and area. The article includes detailed information about copies of the stele including current location and historical discovery.
The Early Scholarship section contains a brief history of those who interacted with the stele after its discovery followed by a section titled Frame. It's unclear to me why it is called Frame but it does contain a detailed description of the contents of the Code followed by a section that displays the laws found in the Code in an easy-to-read table.
The next sections include theories regarding the purpose or use of the Code as well as, according to scholars, the underlying principles of the Code. I found this section to be both interesting as well as lacking in several references. The final section that was specifically about the Code of Hammurabi was on language which seems like it might be better earlier in the article.
The article included a final couple of sections that rooted the code in other law collections as well as the social, religious, and cultural context.
Tone and Balance
The article presents as neutral. While I am not as familiar with some of the scholarship presented, the presentation does not seem overtly biased. For me, the bias is present in the lack of variety of scholarship presented as well as the lack of extensive discussion of the impact. While it does present varying perspectives, the perspectives presented do not address any issues of equity and give little critical discussion on the overall impact of the Code on the development of our current legal system.
Sources and References
In general, the sources were from academic material written by male academics. The reference section included a link to a TV soundtrack, a song, and a Discovery Channel piece.
Organization and Writing Quality
In general, the article reads as an academic venture. Later in the article, the writing was not as precise. There were numerous entries that did not include specific details, but rather general statements without attribution.
Images and Media
The article included a variety of images from an image of the actual stele to depictions in art.
Talk Page Discussion
The Talk Page had one statement regarding improvement with two responses. This seems to indicate a small amount of interest in improving the article.
Overall Impressions
Overall, the article was helpful in learning some general knowledge about the Code of Hammurabi as well as learning some of the scholarship. However, the article could be improved by a greater variety of contributions.