User:Yq58/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate the article: Pegasus
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: (link) Pegasus
- Reasoning for evaluation: I have chosen to evaluate this article because Greek mythology has great history and stories.
Lead
[edit]- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it gives you a description of the Deity and his importance to mythology.
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Pin point descriptions and informational.
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? I'm unsure of the question, but they have added links to to the other characters and
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? think detailed to the needed amount, very informative to give you a summary of his life from start to end and everything in between.
Lead evaluation
[edit]Content
[edit]- Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, it even includes references to all related to the topic.
- Is the content up-to-date? Yes
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I do not see it so.
Content evaluation
[edit]I feel it was very informational and up to date, since it is history/mythology from the past. I have read books and recollect the information stated in this article. It is also very informative as it did contain things I also did not know.
Tone and Balance
[edit]- Is the article neutral? Yes, purely informational, exactly like an encyclopedia.
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No. It strictly states what had happened, not leaning to one character than the other, or favoring a character etc.
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I do not believe so, I feel they had a perfect balance at executing the information.
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Definitely not.
Tone and balance evaluation:
[edit]Very well done and a non-biased way to tell the story of Pegasus. Informational and detailed the perfect amount, not excessively.
Sources and References
[edit]- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes they have numerous references, although most from wiki.
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
- Are the sources current? As current as they can be, since it is history. Most recent being from 2018.
- Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they redirect or inform me correctly.
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]Well included, although I would have liked to see more external references.
Organization
[edit]- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, not messy, cleared one path.
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I guess there might be a few, but I am not professional in grammar so I would not have noticed.
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, clear paragraphs and story movements.
Organization evaluation
[edit]Well done and well spaced. Not overwhelming or disturbing in formatting.
Images and Media
[edit]- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, they clearly state he is a flying horse.
- Are images well-captioned? Yes, along with being dated.
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I believe so as they all have external links and are cited.
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Absolutely.
Images and media evaluation
[edit]Very well done and brings the ancient information to life.
Checking the talk page
[edit]- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? es it is part of Mythology, Greece, Greece &Rome, along with Heraldry& Vexillology.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? These are very opinionated and have agree&disagreements.
Talk page evaluation
[edit]A bit of a mess, and more opinion based than factual. Some do provide evidence, but they may be coming from a biased mentality. Although some are just trying to correct.
Overall impressions
[edit]- What is the article's overall status? I would give it a 10/10.
- What are the article's strengths? Information along with photos.
- How can the article be improved? I'm unsure as it looks well done to me.
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I think it has what is needed. For an example if I was conducting a study on Pegasus and wanted to get the basis of it as I had no clue, it gets to the point without confusion but a good amount of detail.
Overall evaluation
[edit]Clear and concise, perfect balance of info and detail.
Optional activity
[edit]- 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 — ~~~~
- Link to feedback: