User:Anwuzor1/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

 * LGBT culture in Baltimore:(LGBT culture in Baltimore)
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article because I believe the interesting topic has a long history of being unpublished or unrecorded, and so older primary sources may be helpful. On a personal aspect, I enjoy the LGBT community and its culture.

Lead

 * Lead evaluation
 * The lead does explain why LGBT culture in Baltimore is a huge part of Baltimore Culture but also the LGBT community as a whole. However it does not provide a description, brief or otherwise, of any of the articles sections. The lead doesn't include information that is absent from the article.The lead is more concise than overexplained, and could benefit from a small summation of the articles main points.

Content

 * Content evaluation

The content of the argument focuses more on unorganized listing of historical events. It could be improved possibly by having the topic in mind while organizing a table of contents.The content of this article excludes events from May 2019 onward, the 9 month hiatus in content may be important seeing that the Modern Culture is changing every day. As far as culture goes, this articles cover many topics that are relevant to it, And there isn't any content that doesn't fit.

Tone and Balance

 * Tone and balance evaluation

The article is mostly neutral. It explains events in the way they were reported. It seems; however, that in an attempt to be unbiased, the main editor seems to have failed to bridge the topics together, a difficult, but doable task I believe.There are no claims that are based towards any particular position. It seems that some viewpoints are underrepresented, via perpetrators of hate crimes, though its possible, sources for those viewpoints were harder to come across.This article makes no attempt to sway the reader in any direction whatsoever.

Sources and References

 * Sources and references evaluation

All the facts presented are backed up by a reliable second source of information. And many of the sources presented are thorough, few however, reflect available literature on the topic. However there is a clear absence of that. The sources presented are mostly current, many from current Baltimore Newspapers. The few that aren't talk about history of events that took place years ago. As far as the links go, they few that I checked worked fine.

Organization

 * Organization evaluation

The article is clear written and easy to read, but it lacks some grammatical fixations, While there are no blatant spelling errors, there are some grammatical ones. And as far as organization goes, the article is broken into sections that reflect the topic, but the lead doesn't explain the major points well. So it's hard to understand what sections importance are to the main article.

Images and Media

 * Images and media evaluation

The images in the article are well rounded and give a basic context to the topics. Some of the captions of the images are less explicit or explanatory in their relevance to the topic or major points. It's most likely because they were better explained in the paragraphs adjacent to them. The images adhere to the copyright regulations of Wikipedia, and are laid out in a somewhat appealing way. They are pretty basic.

Checking the talk page

 * Talk page evaluation

The articles talk page is void of interactions. The only thing present is an analysis of who the article is for as far as Wikipedia C-classes go, and two requests for photographs of "Gay Life" and "Pride Center of Maryland". The article is included in Wiki-project Culture, LGBT studies, Maryland/Baltimore, and Sexology and sexuality. This is very different from what I expected because, there isn't much Wikipedian collaboration visible.

Overall impressions

 * Overall evaluation

Overall the article is presented in an organized and clear way. It seems that a big strength of this article is learning about Gay Historical events in Baltimore. It could, however, be improved with a better bridging of the subtopics into the main articles title and idea. It does seem that this article is a bit overdeveloped, but could easily be edited down.


 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: