User:Palladiumpaladin/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?
[edit]Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]I chose this article because ceilidhs are something that I've attended a lot of, and I believe it's an important part of Gaelic culture. In my preliminary look at the article, it looks a bit short in the history section, but the section on modern ceilidhean seems to be more robust.
Evaluate the article
[edit]The lead section is concise and starts with a clearly describing sentence, but doesn't properly provide a brief description of each section, and it contains information not found in the rest of the article. The content of the article seems all relevant, but a lot more attention is given to the subsection "Similar gatherings in England" than I would expect, and a lot less attention is given to ceilidhs outside of the British Isles. Even within the British Isles, Northern Ireland only gets one sentence. This seems to me like a bit of an equity gap, giving much more attention to a group that has historically been overrepresented (the English) than groups that have been historically marginalized (North American, Australian, New Zealander, and Northern Irish Gaels). The information seems up to date though, talking about ceilidhs into the modern decade of the 2020s. The article's tone seems neutral, but again, ceilidhs outside of the British Isles are not touched on. The citations I checked have functioning links, and support the information they're cited for. The page could use more citations for the information it gives, but the sources it uses seem to be neutral, and are a diverse group with both their authors and their publications. The talk page has conversations about representing more areas that ceilidhs happen in in the article's images, merging the Céilí dance article with this one (which did happen), and adding new sources. The article is of interest to the Dance, Scotland, Celts, and Ireland WikiProjects, where it is not rated in the Dance WikiProject and is a C-class article in the other three. The members in the talk page discuss the topic in a much more removed way than how we would talk about it in class.