Misplaced Pages

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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Tone and Balance Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages'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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages 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?

(Provide a link to the article here.)

I am evaluating the article on Guido I da Montefeltro.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose to evaluate this article because Guido I da Montefeltro is such a realistic portrayal of the nature of humankind in Dante's Inferno. Often, characters in Hell are portrayed as wholly sinful, such as Pope Boniface III, who is referenced multiple times for his corruption. When I read Guido I da Montefeltro's story in Canto XXVII, he was the first character in Hell for which I –and perhaps other readers– could relate to, through his winding journey between goodness and sinfulness.

This article matters because Guido I da Montefeltro was a real person – not simply a work of Dante's literary creation. It is useful for students of Inferno to know more historical background on the characters and events that Dante refers to, in order to gain a better understanding of Dante and his imagined version of Hell.

My preliminary impression of the article was that it is very sparse. There aren't any photos, and while there are links to other Misplaced Pages pages, there aren't any actual citations. In addition, the earlier years of Guido's life isn't mentioned. Guido was supposedly born in 1223, based on the lead section, but the first complete description of his life begins in 1275. This led me to wonder whether this is because there isn't any information on his life before 1275, or whether the article contributors simply did not include this information. I also noticed that the article's Talk page was empty, and the article revisions are relatively few and far between.

Evaluate the article

(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Misplaced Pages article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section

• The lead includes an introductory, though vague, overview on Guido I da Montefeltro. However, the lead has no citations at all. A citation would be valuable because the birth date (currently listed as 1223) is likely incorrect. I have checked this information against three Dante encyclopedias: Dartmouth Dante Project , Danteworlds, and The World of Dante. All three of these scholarly sources cite that Guido I da Montefeltro's birth date was 1220, not 1223.
• The article contains only two sections: "Biography" and "Role in Dante's Inferno," but the lead does not introduce these sections. The lead mentions Guido's career in the Italian military and as a friar in the Church, but the "Biography" section does not distinguish these careers into subsections.
• No, there isn't any information in the lead that is not in the article.
• The lead is concise (two sentences).

Content

• The content is relevant to the topic.
• The content is not necessarily outdated, but the sole reference book was published in 2000, over two decades ago. In addition, fact checking is needed. Example above, regarding the birth date.
• Yes, I believe there is content missing in this article. Many online Dante encyclopedias, including the ones linked in the section above, include images of illustrations from either early editions of Inferno, or artist interpretations. In addition, the section on Guido's role in Inferno is bare-boned. There is so much scholarly study on Dante's depiction of Guido in Canto XXVII that I feel is worth mentioning.
• No, the article doesn't address historically underrepresented populations, but I believe it may address a historically underrepresented topic. The reason why I believe this is because of the relatively little information available on Dante's historical references.

Tone and Balance

• I believe that a large portion of the article is written from a neutral point of view, with the exception of the battle paragraph. It is difficult to tell what is neutral because there are no citations.
• The second paragraph under the "Biography" section is questionable because the battle discussion appears to lean in favor of the Ghibelline faction. For example, this phrase: "Guido commanded the defenders during the siege of Forlì in 1282-1283...." It is unclear to me whether the term "the defenders" is truly neutral or whether it is in favor of the Ghibellines. Another example is this phrase: "Although Guido's forces inflicted heavy casualties on their foes, eventually Forlì fell to the papal forces...." Here, it appears to me as though the contributor is portraying Guido's forces as the protagonists or underdogs. Citation here would be extremely useful.
• The article doesn't appear to include minority or fringe viewpoints.

Sources and References

• No sources at all! There are many links to other Misplaced Pages pages, but no reliable, neutral, independent sources. There is one reference to The Dante Encyclopedia, edited by Richard Lansing (2000), but it is unclear which / how much information was sourced from this reference.
• The sole reference listed was published in 2000. I do not feel this is current, but the information may or may not have changed much, given the nature of the topic.
• The reference was written by a sole author who is not a historically marginalized individual (Caucasian male professor).
• Yes, there are a wide variety of reliable sources available through scholarly, Dante-specific resources. For example: Dartmouth Dante Project , Danteworlds, The World of Dante, "Lectura Dantis, Inferno: A Canto-by-Canto Commentary" (University of California Press, 1999) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520920538, publications through the International Dante Bibliography.
• Most of the links work, and are connected to other Misplaced Pages articles. However, there are three links that Misplaced Pages indicates as "page does not exist." These are: Ponte San Procolo, Raversano, and Federico I.

Organization and Writing Quality

• The article is concise, clear, and easy to read. However, I would suggest that more information be added, so that the flow of the article is easier to follow.
• There are no grammatical errors. In terms of the three missing links (Ponte San Procolo, Raversano, and Federico I), I do question the spelling of these. I found that there is a village outside the city of Faenza called San Procolo Al Ponte. This is likely what the contributor was referring to. Instead of Raversano, there is a province nearby Faenza to the east, called Ravenna.
• I believe the article is below-satisfactory in its organization, as there are only "Biography" and "Role in Dante's Inferno" sections. I would divide the "Biography" section into at least two subsections that cover Guido's military involvement and his role as friar. I would also divide the "Role in Dante's Inferno" section into subsections that go into more detail on his inclusion in the eighth circle of Hell, and cover multiple points of view from scholarly commentary.

Images and Media

• No images or media! Columbia University's Digital Dante includes original illustrations from early editions of the text, and the World of Dante also includes illustrations / artistic renderings.

Talk Page Discussion

• The Talk page is empty, but there are multiple revisions under "Revision History," which makes me wonder why contributors aren't discussing edits. That being said, the edits are very infrequent, sometimes jumping a full year before being revised.
• The article is rated as Start-Class, and is part of the "Biography/Military" WikiProject.
• In class, we discussed Guido da Montefeltro in greater depth than this article contains, focusing less on his biography (which is the foundation of this article) and more on how Dante portrays him as a remorseful shade engulfed in flame.

Overall Impressions

• I believe this article is off to a good start, but needs a significant amount of cited content and media added for it to be a fully-fleshed article.
• The article's strengths are that it contains a bare-bones amount of information, which enables it to be primarily fact-driven, rather than interpretive.
• A significant shortcoming of this article is the lack of cited information! With more information, there can be a more productive organizational structure to the article, as well.
• At this point, I would say the article is underdeveloped, bordering on poorly-developed.
  

1. ^ "Guido I da Montefeltro", Misplaced Pages, 2021-02-05, retrieved 2021-02-28