User:101Schultzy/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: (link) Afterlife
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article, because it looks like a fun read, and I am interested in the themes and topics of afterlife.

Lead

Guiding questions

The introductory sentence explains, with a clear and precise definition, life after death. With this definition, it does help to describe that the topic in the article will be on the afterlife. The Lead also helps to clarify sections of the article dealing with different views and different religions dealing with varying beliefs of the afterlife. The Lead does not include information not present in the article. The Lead seems to be a over detailed just a tad.

• 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?
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

Guiding questions

The article's topic is relevant to the topic on the afterlife. The content is up to date and there is nothing missing. From what I scrolled through, the content is relevant to the afterlife and belongs in the article.

• 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?

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

The article is very neutral. It marks numerous different religions and their belief on the afterlife while maintaining a neutral tone. There do not appear to be any claims that appear heavily biased favoring one religion over the other on their beliefs of the afterlife. On every section dealing with a different religion, I think the bigger religions have more coverage than the lesser known religions like Orthodox Christianity compared to Wicca. The article does not have any persuasive words or verbal tons present in the article.

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

Sources and References

Guiding questions

According to the reference page, the article is backed up with reliable reference sources. The references linked to the topic on all the religions and the afterlife are backed up with reliable sources also dealing with the similar subjects of the afterlife like The Riddle of Life and Death article. The sources are also current and a lot of the sources date to earls 2000s. However, some of the links do not work.

• 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?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

Guiding questions

This article is well written. It is a little bit hard to read because there is a lot of details and it also deals with a very broad topic trying to bring different religions together to show varying views and beliefs. Besides it not being easy to read, I do think it is very concise on relating back to the topic of the afterlife. I do not see any grammatical or spelling grammars. I think the article is well organized breaking up different religions to talk about the afterlife.

• 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

Guiding questions

The article does include images, and they do have good captions underneath them. One picture had permission details while two others had a public domain tag. The two images do not adhere to Wikipedia's Copyright Regulations due to the public domain not being tagged in the U.S..I do think the images are visually appealing and show a lot of the artistic details curtailing to the afterlife and religion.

• 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?

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions

A lot of the conversations going behind the scenes deals with revisions that can be done to the article to make it better and improve it. The article has been listed as a level 3 being a vital article in the Philosophy section. The article is also rated a C-Class. It is part of a WikiProject and revisions are being worked on for improvement of the article. The discussions are very straight forward and provide details for what needs to be fixed. I think what makes it different from what we have talked about in class is the To-Do list section. The section helps give assignments for people to do.

• 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

Guiding questions

The overall status of the article is incomplete. I think the article's strength lies in covering numerous views with varying religions on their beliefs in the afterlife. I think it can be improved by giving each section equal amounts of information and not being over detailed where it is hard to read. I think the article is still underdeveloped and should have more improvements dealing with adding or deleting information that is to week in one section, but too strong in another.

• 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?

Optional activity

• 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: