User:AbleArcher99/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Georgia Institute of Technology College of Computing

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I was to choose an article "related to your course to read and evaluate." There did not appear to be an article about my home university. Georgia Tech seemed like it would suffice. Also, I was not familiar with the article, so it seemed like something new to evaluate.

Evaluate the article
The introductory sentence could be more encapsulating of the overall topic. It starts into the origin of the program right away. The Leas section does a good job of previewing the rest of the article that follows. There does not appear to be information present in the Lead section that is not in the rest of the article, but some of the connection is not directly clear. Overall, the Lead section is not overtly detailed to be a lead section

The article is relevant to the topic, and it broke things down into reasonable areas. The article contained information up to about last year, and that appears to be up to date. Given the nature of the article, there is likely missing information that is known about the university but not contained, but the article appears reasonably complete. There does not appear to be anything that should not be there that is present. The section on notable alumni includes women and minority representation. Without knowing the totality of notable alumni, it is hard to know if there are gaps in reporting or if the information is representative of the total population. The section on Student life and community includes reporting of groups that appear focused on women and minorities. The enrolment section mentions the school's gender balance being in parity with similar institutions.

The article appears to be neutral. There are reported external accounts of the school that are favorable, but they are from sources that are respected (US News, WSJ) or otherwise notable (the sitting US president). There is information about low cost tuition options, and it is implied that a lower tuition is preferable, but that is not a boas as to the quality, since a low cost is an objective measure. There does not appear to be anything controversial reported, and that could be an omission. As there isn't a specific favorable tone toward the school, there is no minority option presented either. The article does not appear to persuade the reader into a favorable option, but it does list objective items that a reader would likely believe favorable schools include.

The source appear to be moderate quality given the nature of the topic. Many items are from the University, but that would be a definitive source on what is available at the university. There are press releases and internal organization articles included, but there are some topics with limited reporting outside of university press releases and other sources appear diverse. Most of the sources are older than 10 years old. There are a few sources from the last four years.

There do not appear to be many marginalized sources, but the lack of marginalized credentials is not indicative either way. Not every source link works. Some use the Way Back Machine.

Much of the article is very list oriented. The parts that are more paragraph structured are clear and concise. They appear free of grammatical and spelling errors. Vocationally it is a wordy article, but that is a style choice. The breakdown is a reasonable one based on topic and it matched the Lead section.

The selection of media is bland. There are three images of buildings. One is without caption, a second is just contextual and not called out in the article. The last image has a section in the article, and it links to its own article. The layout is appropriate to the article, but it is not an exciting layout.

The talk page has some useful information about the article. There is discussion of expanding of the history section. The remainder is about updating of links. While useful, the discussion was not very exciting. The article link was a subpart of "Academic disciplines." Under that, it was a subpart of Computer science departments in the United States.

Overall, the article was useful but not compelling. It could be more comprehensive but adding more information might be difficult if an editor desire high quality sources. The article could go into more detail about the colleges relationship with the overall university. The also could be reporting on the research coming out of the school. It appears generally complete and developed.