User:Maxmattaaa/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](Provide a link to the article here.) Federal Bureau of Investigation
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit](Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.) I chose this article because I have always had an interest in the FBI and would like to learn more about it, and why it is so important.
Evaluate the article
[edit](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 Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)
Lead Section
The lead in the Federal Bureau of Investigation has a pretty well developed introductory sentence, and it talks a lot about the FBI and gives a well written description about it. The lead does include a brief description of the article's major sections throughout the entire article. The lead does not include many irrelevant facts and has a lot of important things. The lead is in the middle of both being long and short, I feel that it is a good length and has a lot of important information.
Content page
The content in this article is very relevant and I feel the topics that have been talked about on it are very relevant. The article looks like it has a lot of up to date topics and it looks like it has been updated very recently. There is definitely some topics that can be added to it, everything in here is explained pretty well so far and nothing needs taken out. Throughout the article there are equity gaps there are some stuff in there but it is room for things to be put in there such as types of groups inside the FBI.
Tone and Balance
I would say that the article is neutral and it doesn't really have a side, it's all just talking about the FBI and what it is. From what I read so far there are not any claims that are completely bias towards them or a certain position. There are not many things that are over said or understated throughout the article. There are not very many minority or fringe view points in the article. The article doesn't try to persuade one another in it, there are many different view points and its not bias.
Sources and References
From everything and all the links I had clicked to check and see if they are reliable, they had been backed up by secondary sources. Most of the sources in the article are thorough and they show the available literature on the topic shown. There are mostly current sources but there are some that are from awhile ago and not up to date. The sources are written by a lot of different authors and people. They do involve historically marginalized people. There is definitely some help that can be done for some of the sources in this article. I checked the links and most of them work and take you to a resourceful website.
Organization and writing quality
This article is written well with lots of length and good sources. The article does not have any gramical errors that I have noticed or read. It is pretty well organized and broken down into sections that make sense.
Images and Media
The article has many pictures to go with the topics, although some could give a better picture that describes the topic. Some of the images on the page are not captioned of what they are, and some are. I am not sure if all of the images are copyright regulation. I feel the images could be placed better because they are not very appealing.
Talk Page discussion
There were not many conversations in the talk page but the few that were just talking and agreeing on topics. The article is a B class article and it is highly rated. There isn't a different way it's been the same.
Overall impressions
The articles overall status is good and has been recently updated. The articles strengths are how much there is on different topics. The article is definitely missing a few things like more topics about inside the FBI. I feel that the article is 75% complete, it's written well but things can always be improved.