User:Aboardm1/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Avdotya Panaeva

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article, because Avdotya Panaeva seemed to be a fascinating woman. While, I don't read Russian, I figured it would be worthwhile to further research an author that I may not be able to read on.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is extremely brief, touching on the types of works Panaeva wrote and the fact that she wrote under a pseudonym. Her writing under a pseudonym is not further addressed in the article. the lead section does not go in depth about the following sections, but that is likely due to the fact that the only section is a short biography.

The content of the article is also extremely brief. The content is relevant, but lacks depth. After exploring other linked Wikipedia pages, is appears that information form those pages would be useful to include in this page. More information should be included about the nature of her works, details of her works, publication history, etc.

The article is neutral. The article is so brief that it does not appear to have any information that could be written in a biased manner.

The sources appear to be relevant and current, being published in 1990 or later. Three of the six sources were published in Russian. More information about Panaeva may be acquired from sources not directly about her, including biographies of her partner Nikolai Nekrasov-- these sources may be useful to include.

The article is concise and well-written given the available information.

The image is well-chosen and follows Wikipedia guidelines.

The article is quite brief and lacks depth regarding Panaeva's life, societal involvement, and works. Despite these shortcomings, the article is well written. The article may be improved by finding other, perhaps indirect, sources about Panaeva, and by adding information that is present on related Wikipedia pages to this page. Added detail may increase the importance of this article to other WikiProjects.