User:ArmandoCSUSB/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Art movement

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose it at first just because I thought it looked interesting.

Evaluate the article
The lead of this article goes straight to the point and describes the article's topic, but it does not have a brief description of the major articles. The article follows the rule of not including any extra content in the lead that is not talked about in the major sections. The content is relevant to the article as it describes the main idea of the article, but the article sends the reader to many other Wiki articles to read up on other articles to read up on content that may need to be on this article. This article does a good job at not attempting to persuade people. The article does include minority perspectives in the sense of sending the reader to other Wikipedia articles to find out more about those subjects. The articles uses a plethora of references that are relevant to the article, however, the article depends heavily on sending the reader to other Wikipedia articles to read up about events that happened related to this article. The article also makes use of many authors of various backgrounds. The article is well-written and it is easy to understand the concepts of the article, but because of the lack of writing on the topic, there is some confusion because of the need for more content. The images in the article do follow the copyright rules and are relevant to the article. They are well-captioned and are laid out in a visually appealing way. There were many discussions that happened behind the scenes that make the organization of the article more understandable. It is also rated as start-class, which means it does not have a good rating. This is not something that we have discussed in class yet, however, the community behind the creation of the article seemed to have many disagreements in its creation. The article is incomplete, it does not have many strengths because it misses out on a lot once the lead ends. The article requires heavy improvements because it is missing a large amount of information that would better explain the article.