User:Abihello6/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Seattle underground

Seattle Underground - Wikipedia

Why have you chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I choose this one because Seattle Underground because the article was labeled as a "start" article, meaning there is still some work that the page could use. This page matters because Seattle underground has become a popular tourist attraction and the wiki page doesn't delve in deeper into how it came to be what it is today, a lot of people probably want to learn more about what it used to be, and how it became underground track and now today how it became a tourist attraction. My first impression of the page was how short it was, because the information seemed lack luster and the fact that the page didn't have many sources, it only had four.

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.

Lead section: The Seattle Underground is concise and talks about what it used to be and what it is today and also says where it is. The lead does include information that isn't in the rest of the article, for example it says "In recent decades they have become a tourist attraction, with guided tours taking place around the area" but there's not section where it talks about why and how it became a tourist attraction today.

Content/Source: The content is not up to date, there are a total of four references, and they are not up to date. The last reference was from 2011 and that's almost 10 years old so the content is not up to date. Also, one of the references used isn't a "scholarly article" and is just something pulled from an old website.