User:Mightdino49/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 the PGLang article because it is a company started by one of my favorite artists, Kendrick Lamar. The company produces records and music videos, and has an upcoming feature film. My initial impression is that it does a good job of representing the history and accomplishments of the company.
Evaluate the article
[edit]First of all, the page has a C rating according to its Talk page, which indicates that it has some gaps and could be updated more. The lead section isn't incredibly detailed, and could provide more context as to the founding and direction of the company. The structure seems as clear as it could be, going from History of the company, to the company's artists, discography, filmography and accolades. I'm not sure what other viewpoints or sources could be added to the article, but perhaps there is more context that could be added to the history and vision of the article. It appears to be well sourced, every idea has a source attached to it. The article's tone is neutral and doesn't have much opinion from an author apparent.