User:Abbyprodente/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Outdoor fitness

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this topic because it interests me. I never thought that there could be a historical background for why people exercise outside. It matters because fitness of all kind is vital in our lives and this subcategory is not only beneficial to people's physical health but also to their mental health. My first impression was that this was strange; why do they have a whole wikipedia page that is on exercise done outside.

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 Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)


 * Everything in the article was concise and related to the topic at hand
 * While there are no claims that appear to try and sway the reader, the passage only talks about outdoor fitness as a good thing. There could be some drawbacks to it as well and they don't really explore them. Like how it is weather permitting, it could be unsafe for people especially women at some times of day, it could be dangerous if you have allergies, etc.
 * They only mention the benefits. There are a lot of benefits and I am not anti fitness but they make it seem one size fits all, which isn’t the case. But also the article could be seen as encouraging because it is making people think of all these benefits
 * Many of the links and sources that I tried work well and provide information on the topic
 * Each fact does have a reliable reference. The sources are neutral and talk about information relating to the topic like outdoor events and the history of when exercise became more popular. But I did find 2 sources that led me to pages that included no information on them. Whether they were taken down or what I don't know but it doesn't help for finding reliable sources
 * With the sources I found that led me to empty pages, they could be updated. They probably used to have good information related to the topic but since they don't have good information now they are useless.
 * There are no conversations on the talk page happening.
 * It is a part of the WikiProject Health and Fitness, "a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia." The article has been rated as start class on the quality scale. But has not been rated on the importance scale
 * The article definitely achieves it's original rhetorical objective to inform and educate audiences.


 * 1) The article provides a brief but important lead section that includes the definition of outdoor fitness, how it is slightly different from indoor exercise, examples of where it can take place, and a brief history in which it dives further into later in the article.
 * 2) Content of the article is relevant and up to date. It talks about some examples of outdoor fitness events that have become popular in some regions of the world. It talks about the history but does it very comprehensively and makes sense with the other content in the article.
 * 3) Not all information is backed up by a reliable secondary source and not all links work. But the ones that do work cover the information included and are relevant to what the article is talking about