User:C.Shoebox/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
American Type Founders

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because it is an interesting topic to me in the communication category. This evaluation matters because an article about a printing press company will most likely be neglected since it is no longer relevant. My preliminary impression of this article is that it has a very in depth discription of what has occurred with this company. I would say that if I were to change anything, it were to add more attention grabbing details in such a large article.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this article is very effective in the way of giving the reader a brief overview of what this printing press company was and how it was formed. I would say though that this section does not really give a brief overview over what each section is and what they are trying to do with each section of this article. Everything that the lead states is mentioned and explained later on in the article and is concise.

The content of this article does put a large amount of weight on certain sections and then neglects others, this may be because of the lack of information out there about the topics of the sections. The content of this article is relevant to the topic as there is mountains of information given on it. This content is up to date and there is a very small chance of there being any changes to that since these companies have been out of business for more than twenty years. All of the content of this article belongs with it as the author was very passionate about getting all of the information out there. This article does not deal with any equity gaps.

This article is written from a neutral point of view by only educating the reader about facts of what happened. In this, the article does not make any assumptions or has any biases toward one way or another. I found this article to be very informational on what happened with this company.

The sources and references that this article uses are used thoroughly, they take the information from them and site the sources accordingly. After clicking a few of the links, they are still accurate and work properly.

The organization of the article is the biggest pain point of the article. This is that the first main section of the article tends to scare most readers away since it is so large. Instead I would recommend that this section should be broken up into smaller sections that describe where each consolidation came from and why it made the best fiscal sense. The article is great when it comes to being grammatically correct and not having misspelling.

The conversations that are going on behind the scenes of this article are few. One part of the conversation is very friendly and helpful on what they are doing to the article while another is just a claim made by an editor without any backed up information. This article is not rated since it needs more citations for this article to be verified.

My overall impression of this article is that this article was well written and is very detailed. I would say that this covers almost anything related to this company and is very effective. The state of the article seems like it has not been touched in a while which may be just okay, but I would say that other Wikipedians should approach this and at least get this article verified.