User:141.161.133.110/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

Name of article: The Perks of Being a Wallflower
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article to evaluate because The Perks of Being a Wallflower is one of my favorite novels, and I really enjoyed its adaptation into a film. It was a book recommended to me by a school's reading list, so it is interesting that it was a banned book. I am eager to learn more about its reception and other reasons that it was challenged.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes, I think that this sentence is comprehensive and concise. It provides relevant introductory information that a reader would need for context.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Yes, the lead mentions each topic that will later be described.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- No, all presented information is covered in the body of the article.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- The lead is concise.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes, it is relevant.
Is the content up-to-date?
- The content is fairly up to date given that one of its sources is dated in 2018.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- There is no content missing, though its censorship could benefit from some more detail. All the content is relevant to the topic.

Is the article neutral?
- Yes, there are no apparent opinions included.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- No.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- No, the article includes both the novel's positive and negative feedback.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- No. The article contains information.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes.
Are the sources current?
- Yes -- though there are many from the year 2014.
Check a few links. Do they work?

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- For the most part, yes. However, the summary sentences can get too long and rambling making it hard for a reader who has never read the book to follow.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- There are a few minor grammatical errors.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes, the article is well-organized in the same order the lead suggests.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Yes.
Are images well-captioned?
- Yes.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Yes, all images are correctly attributed.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- Yes.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- There are a lot of comments about the book's censorship and reception, signaling a desire to round out this section of the article with more information.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- It is rated GA, mid importance. It is a part of WikiProject Novels, WikiProject Pennsylvania, WikiProject Pittsburgh, WikiProject LGBTQ Studies, and WikiProject Children's literature.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- Wikipedia gives an unbiased summary of important factors of the novel and omits analysis.

What is the article's overall status?
- The article is public and relatively complete.
What are the article's strengths?
- It is comprehensive in summary and author's inspiration.
How can the article be improved?
- It could include more information on censorship and musical references. It could also include more of the author's bio.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- I think it is complete and developed though could address some of the

strong

Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~~~~