User:Bluemarker06/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
English studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I haven chosen this article because this is not something that I have read about. It is also interesting to learn the history, fields of study, and exactly what english studies are. With english being the most spoken language, good english is so important to learn. It is also important to know what english encompasses. My preliminary impression is that this article holds a lot of information and is very beneficial to read. But, it seems to be lacking information about english is primary grades.

Evaluate the article
Overall, this article includes good information but could be improved. The lead section has a good overview of what english studies are and the first sentence is concise with the information. But, this section includes information that is not in the rest of the article; it also does not give a clear and brief description of the other sections. The lead is a little detailed, but that goes along with the fact that there is information there that is not in the other sections. When it comes to the content, it is up-to date and it mostly include good, accurate information. This article does not include topics that deal with Wikipedia's equity gaps or underrepresented populations/topics. It also appears to have a biased against going to college or just getting a technical English B.A.. When it comes to the sources, the article seems to have some good and reliable sources. The sources could have been a little more current as one was from 1987 and others were from the early 2000s. After clicking on a few links, there are scholarly articles but there are also some random online articles; which you have to be very cautious when choosing. When it comes to the organization of the article, it is nicely organized and separated. It can get a bit wordy with the constant lists of things but otherwise it is good and there are no spelling errors. It is interesting that there are no pictures for reference, though. Something to notice is that in the the talk page does bring up the fact that the sources are not the most reliable and that there can be further discussion on some of the sections. It seems as if some of the information was just thrown in without much guidance. This article can be improved by removing the vocabulary that shows the bias and further explaining the sections. Like I said earlier, there is not much discussion on english other than in high school. It seems to have too many details for the little explaining. In general, this article could use some revising and further discussing.