User:Taram21/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: Bantustan
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- Bantustans played a central role in the South African apartheid government and are therefore important for African politics as a whole.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Yes
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- No
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- It is concise - it summarizes well points that are brought up in other parts of the article.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes, definitely.
Is the content up-to-date?
- The article ends in 1989, which is when bantustans are abolished, so the article is up-to-date based on the topic timeline.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- No.

Is the article neutral?
- No - there is a banner stating that the neutrality of the article is disputed.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- The talk page largely discussed the "Usage in non-South African contexts" section, which states (controversially) that the term "bantustan" has been used in Israel, Sri Lanka and other contexts. So potentially it is biased, but that's unclear.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- No
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- No

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes
Are the sources current?
- Yes, to the time period.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Not that I saw
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- The conversations are mainly about the use of the term "bantustan" in places beyond South Africa
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- It has a C-Class rating.
- It is part of 5 WikiProjects
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- We haven't discussed this yet in class, but Wikipedia has focused much more on small details that we wouldn't be able to cover in lecture.

What is the article's overall status?
- The article is well-written but needs further work to contextualize and strengthen the points.
What are the article's strengths?
- It provides crucial details and summarizes important events.
How can the article be improved?
- Further contextualization.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- The article requires further development.

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 — ~~~~