User:Amazur2/Evaluate an Article
 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA 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.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia 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.
Sources and ReferencesA 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.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe 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.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA 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. |
Which article are you evaluating?
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose the Acropolis of Athens because it was listed as a C-Class and was a topic that was discussed in my class. I was interested to learn more about the Acropolis of Athens and to see how detailed its page was for being C-Class, as I would have some knowledge regarding the architecture.
The Acropolis of Athens is important because it offers a distinct insight into the Greek architecture of its time, and it had a large cultural significance to Greek civilization.
Preliminarily, before really reading it, I was impressed by the contents regarding its history. I also appreciated how the different structures on the site plan for major archaeological remains gave a list of direct links to relevant pages.
Evaluate the article
Lead Section
- The introductory sentence gives a good definition of what Acropolis of Athens is, but it could likely be more concise.
- It gives a brief rundown of the history well, but it does not touch on the other important contents in the Contents tab.
- Information provided in the introduction is located elsewhere in the article.
- Overall, the lead is fairly concise and states important information.
Content
- The content of the article is pertinent on the Acropolis of Athena.
- The most recent source was from July of 2021.
- All of the content appears to fit. I think it does a good job of not putting in too much information that in all reality belongs on other, more specific pages (i.e. information on specific structures).
Tone and Balance
- The article is written with neutral words, and seems to be well balanced. The different authors of the page are not distinct, which is good.
Sources and References
- There could be more references:
- First paragraph of Early Settlement does not have a reference
- Another reference in the "Byzantine, Latin, and Ottoman period" would be beneficial
- The "Second World War" section has no citations
- The entirety of the Geology section has no outside citations
- Some of the sources don't appear reputable, such as The Acropolis of Athens-Athensguide
- Most of the retrieval dates for the references are over a decade old.
Organization and Quality writing
- The layout of the page is well organized.
- No noticeable grammatical errors.
- The writing is fairly concise.
Images and Media
- Images are well spaced and labeled.
- Includes video links, as well as an interactive 3D image.
Talk Page Discussion
- Most of the Talk Page discussions are several years old, but a common theme is inconsistencies in the writing. One complaint was of the article not using strong enough language, causing for doubt in some of the facts of the case, which I did notice one case of.
- It is rated C-Class for 5 WikiProjects, and of Top-Importance for 4 of those WikiProjects.
- Most of the conversations are regarding its history rather than its architecture, which is how it differs from my class.
Overall Impressions
- This page has good formatting. It could be improved by providing more sources, which should hopefully also help clear up any inconsistencies that currently exist. Another area of improvement for adding readers' confidence in the material of the page would be to add more sound words that properly indicate the level of certainty for different theories regarding the history o the Acropolis of Athens.
- Overall, I feel as though the article is decent. While there are definitely some improvements to be made, I feel as though there is a lot of important information on the page, and I like how it continues to be concise by having separate, linked Wikipedia entries for each of the major structures within.