User:Agam Horowitz/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Geographer

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I wanted to see the Wikipedia page's explanation of a geographer. The study of geography is important and a "Geographer" should have a Wikipedia page to briefly educate the public on the role. My preliminary impression was that the page was fairly short, but it concisely summarized information on the topic.

Evaluate the article
The lead section begins with a well-written introductory sentence that explains what a geographer is in broad terms, followed by a concise overview of the topic. The lead, however, does not explain what sections will be covered, and mostly contains the bulk of the content for the entire article. The content itself is relevant to the topic and seems to be up-to-date as it covers both historical and modern information about geographers. Due to the shortness of the article, there is definitely information missing, potentially such as a subsection on cartography or education geographers usually receive to pursue this career. While reading the article, I could not identify any notable equity gaps, but overall regarding the content, the article could be improved to be more robust and informational. Regarding the tone of the article, it is neutral without any notable, biased claims. Different viewpoints are represented equally in the short amount of text without persuasion to accept one more than another. After reviewing the citations/sources, the links successfully work, leading to reliable sources that support the information provided in the article. Some facts, however, do seem to be lacking sources to support them. Many of the sources are books and textbooks on the topic as well as published papers from accredited, unbiased journals from many different authors. Overall, the article is well-written, organized, and concise without grammatical errors, but seems to lack lots of information due to its' short length. The images included are arranged in a visually appealing way, have short, concise captions, and do not violate Wikipedia's copyright rules. The article's strengths include it's accuracy with the information provided and conciseness, but the overwhelming weakness lies with the lack of information. I would say the article could be improved by adding more information to make it more well-versed in the topic. In terms of completeness, the article is underdeveloped and would largely benefit from added information.

The Talk page discussion points out pieces of the article that should be improved, such as wordings/grammar, information that should be added, and information that does not belong. There is also discussion about the addition of an external link. The article was selected as the article for improvement for a span of one week in 2021, and it has a Start-Class rating for content along with a Top-Importance rating for importance. It is a part of both the Geography and Occupations WikiProjects. We have not discussed this particular article in class, but I believe the discussion on the Talk Page reflects the lack of information I also observed.