User:Alexandermmmmmm/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Homelessness in the San Francisco Bay Area

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose it because it is directly related to my topic, and could easily be a first read for someone curious about why homelessness in the bay area is particularly bad. However, my first impression of it was that it was not particularly comprehensive and struck me as something which certainly could be biased.

Evaluate the article
The lead sentence of the introduction does not succinctly summarize the topic and instead provides information which though perhaps relevant is definitely not the first piece of information which should be conveyed on the subject.

The lead does not particularly represent the rest of the article, provides significant information not in the later part of the article, is not concise, and is in many ways overly detailed.

The article's content is relevant to the topic, and relatively up to date, but it seems there is a lot of content which is missing regarding other causes of homelessness and other perspectives on its solutions. The article as it exists now presents a very narrow view of the causes for homelessness. The housing regulation viewpoint seems to be overrepresented and taken as fact without sufficient support while other hypotheses are given less time. In this way the article seems to attempt to persuade the reader.

Some claims are missing explicit citations and some are explicitly tagged as needing citations. The sources are not complete but there is a lot of literature on the subject so it would be difficult to include all of it. The sources are current and from a diverse set of backgrounds. The links do seem to work.

The writing quality for the latter half of the article seems to be fairly high, but there are parts where it is more lacking. There we no grammatical or spelling errors I was able to find. The article seems to have a fairly logical structure of historical background.

There are a couple images in the article but they are not particularly helpful. The images are generally well captioned however. The image layout is fine though they should be larger, and appears to adhere to copyright.

The talk page for this article is pretty sparse and the article was rated b class. It is part of the California wikiproject.

Overall, the article is impressive in its historical depth, and provides a lot of interesting statistics and context for the problem. However, it oversimplifies some aspects of the problem and does not provide adequate representation of other viewpoints. The introduction is also problematic in multiple ways. As a whole, I would consider it to be somewhat complete.