User:4thCharlie/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
High Chair

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Article needs a lot of work. It's very short and is missing a lot of Information.

Evaluate the article
Lead section

The lead secretion starts with a clear introductory sentence that describes the basic functions of a standard high chair and how it’s meant to be used by the child sitting in the chair and the person feeding the child. The introduction also goes into a description of the chair’s physical design, although there is a short  section on various chair designs present in the article, the introduction does not give any brief descriptions of the other major sections in the article. In the lead introduction section, it briefly touches on booster seats that are placed on top of standard chairs and another thing that is quite clear to me to which it is describing or talking about. I believe the two sentences after the introduction to be out of place and needed to be more elaborated on in later sections of the article. But besides that the description of the chair is concise and easy to understand.

Content

The content in the article is relevant to the topic, it goes into various designs of the chair and a safety standard regulation. Though the content there is up-to-date, the article itself is missing a majority of important information. Even though historic photos of antique high chairs are present in the article, there is absolutely no section on the history of the high chair nor the history of its design. The article also lacks any information on high chair manufacturers, recalls, high chairs in public establishments, or more information on its hazards and safety standards.

Tone and Balance

This article successfully has a completely neutral tone. There are no claims in the article that come across as biased or trying to persuade the reader in any sort of way.

Sources and References

There is one claim in the article that doesn't have a source to back it up but everything else appears to be properly sourced. I would consider a lot of the article's sources to be questionable. I noticed a lot of the sources being random semi-shady internet articles that overall didn’t seem very credible. One of the sources was just a link to a product you could buy? Don’t see how that’s a source really. Although all the links work and are all up to date, they are definitely less reliable sources and should be updated with more professional sourced information.

Organization and writing quality

The article is well written and organized fairly well. The article has very little information so it wouldn't be too difficult to keep organized. Did not find any spelling or grammar errors.

Images and Media

The article features three images, all placed on the right side of the article. The first shows a somewhat recent looking photo of a baby in a high chair, the second shows a black and white photograph of a baby in a high chair from 1935, and the last shows a photo of an empty antique high chair from a museum. Though the first image is relevant for the introduction; shows how the high is used by a child, the other two have no context in the article. As mentioned earlier the article features no section on the history of the highchair, why add these photos of historical high chairs that weren’t even mentioned in the article? All three images have proper descriptions underneath them.

Talk page discussion

The only thing mentioned on the high chair wikipedia article talk page is the Designing Motherhood assignment for this class. On the quality-scale it is rated at a “start-class” rank and is considered as a “low-importance” article. The article is also part of the scope of the WikiProject Home Living, a project that  aims to improve the coverage of home-related articles on Wikipedia

Overall impressions

I overall believe this article to be a good start but it is severely lacking a lot of information. What I believe the article needs is more sections that go into more details on the chairs such as their history, designs, recalls, safety standards, and other details. Plus the article could definitely use less sketchy looking sources, it needs sources that are more credible and professional.