Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A 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.

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
Is the content up-to-date?
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia 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.

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

A 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.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Are the sources current?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

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

Talk page discussion

The 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.

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?
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

What is the article's overall status?
What are the article's strengths?
How can the article be improved?
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Examples of good feedback

A 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.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?[edit]

The Lightning Thief

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?[edit]

I chose this article to evaluate because this was my absolute favorite series growing up along with Harry Potter, but felt far more relatable and close-to-home due to Percy's age and the novel being set in the United States. Just based on my first impressions and from what I expected, this is a very good and comprehensive Wikipedia article.

Evaluate the article[edit]

Content and tone:

The introduction section in the article could use a lot of work, as it is very short and half of the content is directly focused on information related to the film and television adaptations of The Lightning Thief, which I think could be its own category. Instead, I think the introduction paragraph could include some very brief synopsis of the plot and the major themes and characters, and have a more extensive focus on the books significant cultural impact and global reach (currently, there is nothing in the introduction about the cultural impact and how people responded to it, and the entire introduction section is a single paragraph consisting of five sentences).
The article has been most recently updated on April 11, 2022 when an actor was cast to play Percy Jackson in the television adaptation of the novel.
I think there could definitely be a section on the characters, and as a subsection of that, potentially Riordan's thoughts on the characters and their personalities (as well as his reasons for making them as such). Furthermore, there should definitely be a section on the major themes of the novel and importantly, the "style" of the novel and how it deconstructs and retells ancient Greek mythology in a really appealing way for a modern audience of children and young adults. Adding onto this, there could also be a section on scholarly analysis of this novel, as a quick google search showed there is more than enough to add some scholarly insight to this article.
When it comes to representation, I don't think in this instance any group was under or misrepresented, but I know that the novel features mostly white characters with the exception of Grover (who is a major character and Percy Jackson's best friend), so some more attention paid to Grover and his character's representation could be a good idea if there is a section added about the characters in this novel.
I think that the article is neutral and doesn't appear to be heavily biased towards any particular position, as the information given in the article doesn't really lend itself to bias.

Sources:

Each fact in the article was referenced with a source, and each of the sources listed in the article seemed reliable, appropriate, and neutral, coming from many different sites and publications.

Talk page:

The article is rated as a Language and Literature "good article" which passed a "peer review" in 2011, and it is currently a GA-class, high-importance Children's Literature project. The conversations going on were various, but the biggest topic of conversation was about the "film adaptation" section in which people were concerned about bias and editors inputting their own personal opinion into the article.

Evaluating content[edit]

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
Can you identify any notable equity gaps? Does the article underrepresent or misrepresent historically marginalized populations?
What else could be improved?

Evaluating tone[edit]

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

Evaluating sources[edit]

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
Do the sources come from a diverse array of authors and publications?

Checking the talk page[edit]

Now take a look at how others are talking about this article on the talk page.

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?
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?