User:Nas197/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: Chernoe Znamia
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
I chose to evaluate this article because it will be the focus of my research project, and it looks underdeveloped compared to many other articles on Wikipedia.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
Is the content up-to-date? I think so, but I am not sure. The newest article cited is from 2006.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes, the article does not contain a chronological history of the organization.
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
I do not think so, but I am not sure.

Is the article neutral? Yes.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article claims that Chernoe Znamia was "... the most conspicuous anarchist communist organisation in Russia." This seems like an opinion, but it may be well substantiated elsewhere.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

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? No, there are not enough sources.
Are the sources current? I think so, but I am not sure.
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? There are too few sources to make a judgement.
Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, although there are too few sections and too little information.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? The article only contains one helpful image.
Are images well-captioned? Yes.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
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? The only conversation present concerns the modification of one link.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated Start-Class. It is part of Wikiprojects Anarchism (Low-Importance), Russian History (Mid-Importance), Jewish History, and Terrorism.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We have not discussed Chernoe Znamia explicitly in class, but the article does not thoroughly discuss Chernoe Znamia's role in the larger context of Russia's imperial history as we would have in class, nor does it explicitly illustrate its impact on later decades.

What is the article's overall status? Overall, the article is a good start but incomplete.
What are the article's strengths? It is well written, includes some basic history, and describes the group's tactics and ideology.
How can the article be improved? The article would be better if it contextualized the group's history and described its impact on Russia's history. Additionally, the article does not describe the end of the movement nor the factors that may have caused it to collapse.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is underdeveloped.

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 — ~~~~