User:Rmmiller364/Questions for Article Evaluation

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: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baroncelli_Chapel
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This article needs references, sources, sections, and a lot more information.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The Lead is short and only gives the general location of the chapel.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No it is unfinished and needs more information in its sections.
does not have any major sections it is a stub.oes
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, it needs more information.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is too short.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes but needs elaboration.
Is the content up-to-date? It's content looks to be a few years old at least and not updated.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes, more details about it's location, image examples, and other important pieces of information are missing like more about the supposed fresco artist.

Is the article neutral? Yes.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Everything about the chapel is underrepresented.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it remains neutral.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? There is only a newer book as reference that doesn't appear like it's cited very well.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? It needs way more sources, there should be more literature to use as reference on such a chapel with fresco art.
Are the sources current? The source is only one book in Italian from 2007.
Check a few links. Do they work? There are no links.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It's concise but lacking a lot of details.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? None found.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It needs organization and sections.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There is only two images and they look non-professional.
Are images well-captioned? They are decently captioned but still need more details.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes but they need more.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? None. It was last updated 2 years ago.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It says it is in the class "start" so I assume it's a stub.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It doesn't seem like a well payed out informative Wikipedia page, I have more questions than answers after viewing it.

What is the article's overall status? It needs help, stub still.
What are the article's strengths? It's images, and the fact that it has a lead on one if not it's main artist.
How can the article be improved? More sources, organization, more contribution.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Poorly developed.

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 — ~~~~