User:Bri3866/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Dog coat

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I've chosen this article because I love talking/reading about animals. This article matters because different dog coats are important. All their coats are different from each other. My preliminary impression of this article was very good.

Evaluate the article
The introduction sentence does clearly describe the article's topic. Yes the lead does include a brief description of the article's major sections. Everything in the lead is in the article. This article isn't overly detailed, it has the perfect amount of information in it. The content is up to date. It was last updated on January 21, 2024. Yes the article's content is relevant to the topic. There is no content missing or content that don't belong. No the article doesn't deal with one of Wikipedia equity gaps. This article doesn't address topics that are related to historically underrepresented populations. By looking at this article it looks neutral to me. No there is no heavily biased towards anything in this article. All the viewpoints are equally represented. There is nothing overrepresented or underrepresented. The article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position. Yes there were minority viewpoints that was accurately described. All the facts in the article are backed up by a secondary source of information. Yes the sources reflect the available literature on the topic. For what I can see the sources are current. The sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors. Yes they include historically marginalized individuals. All the sources I've seen are mostly the same. The links do work. The article is well written. I can understand it completely. The grammar is good and I don't see any spelling errors. This article is broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic. In this article it does have images that match with the topic and that helps us understand it. Yes the images are well captioned. The images are laid out in a visually appealing way. All of the images do meet the Wikipedia's regulation. Some of conversations are about different sections of the article not just on one thing. Yes this article is part of a WikiProject. This article is rated a C-Class. They are more in depth with there discussions. The overall status is great. The articles strength is that it has different sections in it and they focus on one section at a time. From what I've seen the article doesn't really not anything else added to it. Finally, this article is well developed.