User:AdityaShelke48/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
This is the article that I am evaluating: High modernism. It has to do with the modern art style that is about the ability of science and technology to engineer a better, more harmonious future. Modernism has the belief that by focusing on facts, equations, and hard data, the world can be improved and made better. Thus, the art style is governed by very industrialist ideals, and the 4 points that characterize high modernity include faith in the abilities of scientists, engineers, and other intellectuals, focus on human control of complex systems, and a strong disdain for ideas stemming from the humanities, such as history and psychology.

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

I have chosen this article to evaluate because it is rated as a C level article. This means that it has significant content issues and does not incorporate a wide variety of perspectives on this topic. It seems as though more perspectives need to be cited and brought into this article, both positive and negative, as well criticisms on this art style and subsection of modernity.

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 lead section is very well put together. The introduction sentence is easy to understand, and gives good context regarding the topic of high modernism. The first sentence provides an easy and simple definition of the topic with not too much detail. However, it is missing a crucial component of a lead section -- a description of each of the major categories.

Content:

The content in certain sections is thorough and well prepared. For example, the section regarding development of high modernism in the third world includes names, places, and history regarding the topic. Everything is well cited, and other Wikipedia articles are referenced. In addition, major historical events such as the Marshall Plan and trends following those plans help solidify just how modernism came into play. This "good" writing is present for the majority of the article.

An issue with the content is a lack of some sections. While modernism is covered in sections about Brazil, the Soviet Union, and Canada, one would expect a similar section for other major countries participating in the high modernism movement. For example, the United States should most likely have its own section as well. In addition, some sections are missing information -- development in the Soviet Union requires more content. The amount of influence that high modernism had on the Soviet Union justifies it.

Evaluating Tone:

The tone is neutral. From the sections I browsed, I did not find any tone that attempts to influence the reader into believing something specific.

Evaluating Sources:

This article is well sourced. PDF's are linked correctly, there are no "needs citations," and other than missing content, the sources for the content currently available is good.

Organization and Balance:

Well organized, but more categories might be better. Instead of grouping many different things such as architecture, art, and music into one category, there should be separate categories for each of these topics. In addition, there should be more categories, such as possibly pop culture, and influences on other movements.