User:AliCat1997/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
George Stroumboulopoulos

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because though it seems well-develop, there are areas that need to be updated and expanded upon.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this page provides users with a brief biography of George Strouboulopoulos, which is concise and can be easily understood by readers. It provides users with a description of George Strouboulopoulos and a summary of only the most important aspects of his career. This page presents users with a neutral coverage of content and also includes certain aspects that are well-balanced. For instance, the image and info box are placed in appropriate locations on the page. Most importantly, the content on this page is not up-to-date and requires assistance in updating its information. There is a variety of sources and references and the links included seem to be functioning. This page is organized by various headings and subheadings which contribute to its clear structure. The talk page displays the fact that this Wikipedia article is classified as a level C on Wikipedia's quality scale, meaning it is substantial but requires more editing to close content gaps. The lead section is properly formatted as the name of the person, George Strouboulopoulos, is bolded. Upon close inspection, this page seems to be free from both grammatical and spelling errors. This page includes an image of George Strouboulopoulos that states it was taken in 2014. There is an info box present, outlining the key facts about George Strouboulopoulos, including his date of birth, birth place, and nicknames. There are various discussions displayed on the talk page. One section from 2007-2008 pertains to the lack of information in the "personal life" section of the page, which is something I want to try to contribute to. There is also a section discussing a portion of the page that is "not a neutral point of view" which was posted in 2008. The user explains that there is a portion of the page that is not neutral, or cited, or verifiable and alerts other users of its immediate removal. The user provides helpful feedback regarding what steps others can undertake to fix the portion in order to added it back in. There is also a section the states the page "reads like an advertisement" which will not align with Wikipedia standards as it is promotion material and not neutral in tone. It is evident that the talk page was busy up until 2018. This talk page is transparent and shows me that the information found on this page is indeed being fact-checked by various users. My overall impressions of this page is that it is well-developed but some sections are outdated and need updating and expanding. This task is easier said than done because it can be difficult to find verified or reliable sources to consult to edit these sections.