User:Jkburton/sandbox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article evaluation: Northanger Abbey: a subpage of Jane Austen[1]
![]() | This is a user sandbox of Jkburton. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the sandbox where you should draft your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. To find the right sandbox for your assignment, visit your Dashboard course page and follow the Sandbox Draft link for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
Questions for consideration:
- Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? I think everything in the article is relevant, although it seems to be missing a section on Reception (of the novel on publication) and the sections are somewhat unevenly developed. Instead it refers back to the main Jane Austen Wikipedia entry. In particular, "Major Themes", and "Development" probably need some additional work, and the "Allusions to other works" is incomplete as it only addressed Gothic novels and not other books or publications that were mentioned in NA. I also found the "Historical source" and "References to Northanger Abbey" sections unsatisfying. The second section mentioned only listed two items and I find that somewhat surprising in a novel that has been around for as long this one has.
- Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article appears to be neutral in tone, but does not seem to draw on very much from the existing scholarship on this novel. The Reference list appears to be extensive, but actually relies heavily on the novel itself and two scholarly references: 1) Brownstein, Rachel, The Cambridge Companion to Jane Austen[2], and 2) Irvine, Robert, Jane Austen. A very quick check through the Library identified a reasonably significant number of publications relevant to NA that could have been referenced.
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? See note above. Without looking in depth at some of the references it is difficult to determine, but just the fact that so few references were cited seems to indicate that that the viewpoints may have been skewed towards the primary references and not include all the different viewpoints.
- Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? I did find a few links that did not work in the citations. I checked the references to Brownstein's article, but it was a little difficult since I had a newer edition of the book than the version referenced. Since that is the case, this reference should probably be updated so that the page numbers match the newer edition and to make sure that the author hasn't done a major rewrite of this article. Several of the artlcles listed did not have the exact page from which the information is taken - it just lists the entire article.
- Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? For the most part, the article appears to be appropriately referenced. The section on "Development" that should be fleshed out will require references. The section on "Adaptation" requires additional references for many of the items. Most of the items listed in "References" are from scholarly publications, but many of those listed for the "Adaptations" could be improved - this was also the section that had links that did not work.
- Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? The "Adaptation" section is probably significantly incomplete and may well be dated. It lists items in 2016, but with the proliferation of things on the Internet these days, there may be much more out there.
- Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There is a note at the beginning of the Talk Page concerning nomination for deletion and that the consensus was to merge into an article with the same name. It is not clear to me what that means - were there two separate NA articles? This action was supposed to have taken place by now. Dates of entries on the Talk Page range from 2006 to March 2017. The page states that it was last edited on 11 March 2017. There were 4 comments between 2006 and 2009, 4 comments between 2010 and 2013, two comments in 2016 and 2017, and one undated comment (didn't think you could do that). There were no comments in 2009, 2011, 2014 and 2015. There was also a note dated September 2016 on the main page that the "Plot Summary' was considered to be too long and a recommendation to make it more concise. There are two comments on the Talk page relevant to that note: one is a comment concerning Catherine's perceptions of Isabella, and the second is a note concerning expanding the plot and responses to that note that are dated 2006-2008. There is also a comment concerning one of the character descriptions (John Thorpe) that needs some work. There is also a suggestion concerning a potential adaptation, and a note on the Baseball reference. The only significant comment appears to be concerning a reference to Marilyn Butler that I do not understand, but it appears to be a discussion about "Allusions to other works". The difficulty is that the language referenced does not appear in the actual article.
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is listed to be of interest to three (3) WikiProjects: 1) WikiProject Novels/19th Century; 2) WikiProject Romance; and 3) WikiProject Women Writers. In all cases, it is rated as C-Class and in two cases (the first and the third) it is also rated as Mid-Importance.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I don't know that this article differs in any significant way as to how this topic is presented. It follows logically from the main Jane Austen article to which it is linked. Its format is very similar to that of the other articles concerning her novels. In quickly checking the other novels, some are more detailed and rated higher than this article, but others are at about the same level.
Article Assignment: Emma (novel)
My plan is to review the existing article in depth to identify where the issues are located and then decide which section I will focus on. This is a relatively lengthy article and has a very active Talk page, so I will need to be very careful in my selection of where to make changes and the research to support that change.
EDITING EMMA
Emma, by Jane Austen, is a novel about youthful hubris and the perils of misconstrued romance and was the last of her six novels to be completed, written while she was in Chawton[3]. The story takes place in the fictional village of Highbury and the surrounding estates of Hartfield, Randalls, and Donwell Abbey and involves the relationships among individuals in those locations consisting of "3 or 4 families in a country village"[4]. The novel was first published in December 1815. As in her other novels, Austen explores the concerns and difficulties of genteel women living in GeorgianāRegency England; she also creates a lively comedy of manners among her characters and depicts issues of marriage, gender, age, and social status.
Before she began the novel, Austen wrote, "I am going to take a heroine whom no one but myself will much like."[5] In the first sentence, she introduces the title character as "Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich."[6] Emma is spoiled, headstrong, and self-satisfied; she greatly overestimates her own matchmaking abilities; she is blind to the dangers of meddling in other people's lives; and her imagination and perceptions often lead her astray.
This novel has been adapted for several films, many television programmes, and a long list of stage plays. It is also the inspiration for several novels.