User:Cam Hist/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Domestic worker

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose the Article on Domestic Worker because I was a little surprised by how many content gaps there are, especially within the History and the History of Domestic work inside the United States. As I was reading through the article, I was confused because the organization of the page didn't seem to flow as well as it could.

Evaluate the article
Lead section: Does a good job of describing what a domestic worker is and shows good examples of what domestic workers could do.

Content: While all the information inside the article is about domestic work I think there are some content gaps and some re-organization that needs to happen.

Tone and Balance: The tone of the article is neutral and good throughout, but the balance is a bit off mostly in the aspect that things need to be expanded, for example the history section starts at 2015.

Sources and References: All the sources seemed relevant and also up to date, some were confusing when just reading the sources but when I went back to the article it made more sense. All the links that I tried worked and directed me to what I had wanted.

Organization and quality: The quality of the writing is professional and neutral, I didn't find any grammatical errors. It is not very well organized in the way that the overall flow sometimes doesn't feel connected. It's helpful that the sections are broken down and labeled but some of the sections seemed like it didn't have the right content or that it should have more content. I also think a few more marginalized groups could be added into this article and their history of being in the domestic work since a lot of marginalized people make up and have made up domestic workers.

Images and Media: There are quite a few pictures of different types of examples of Domestic workers and all are fairly well labeled. I guessed that all the pictures are in line with Wikipedia's copyright but I wasn't sure how to check this. The images are all off to the right side and seem to be in line with what the text is talking about so that is good.

Talk page: The talk page actually had many comments and discussions about the article, these conversations ranged from overall thoughts on how to expand and improve the article to smaller details that people thought were good additions or not appropriate and should be cut. This article is rated as a start class and it seems like it is connected to other possible WikiProjects and was part of another University class, but I could not tell if this article in itself is a WikiProject or not.

Overall Impression: The tone is professional and neutral and does a good job staying that way through the whole article. The article does need some content gap fills and could use a bit of re-organization. Because of the professional tone as well as the content gaps I think this article is at a good starting point but that it needs to be developed a little bit more, by expanding and re-organizing the history section to have it only be about history and make it start at a later historical date and adding in some more information on the individual countries histories I think this article would be much more developed and easier to follow.