User:Carltonh927/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Stephen Demainbray

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because the profile is on a person who is a natural scientist, which, due to my own career interests, I find fascinating. The article is important as it highlights the life and impacts of this scientist, and it appears the article gives adequate information considering what's known about Stephen Demainbray.

Lead Section
The article provides a clean and concise background on the person of subject. It gives a brief overview of where they are from, their importance (natural scientist/astronomer), and their lifespan. It does not provide any extraneous information that is not mentioned elsewhere.

Content
I believe this article provides an adequate background in the information provided. I don't imagine there is much else to discuss about this scientist, so the information provided is appropriate. The content is relevant to the topic and up-to-date. The article does not address any of Wikipedia's equity gaps or any historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Tone and Balance
The article is neutral and does not attempt to bias the readers in any way. The viewpoints discussed were neutral and represented fairly. No fringe or minority viewpoints were discussed. The article does not attempt to persuade the readers in any way at all as well.

Sources and References
All facts in the article were backed up with reliable sources of information. The sources used included encyclopedias, scholarly books, and information from universities. The sources are thorough and current, all within the previous 5 years. There are other articles that can be used, including his own published scientific articles. There are a few peer-reviewed articles that may provide additional information on the topic, although they are not as current as some of the other work published. The links appear to work currently.

Organization and Writing Quality
The article is very well written, clear, and concise. The authors presented the information in a quick and easy-to-read fashion. I did not notice any spelling or grammar errors in my read-through. It is also well-organized, with appropriate sections and a good flow of information.

Images and Media
There is only one photo, which appears to be of Demainbray's work. After a quick Google search, it does not seem like there are any photos of Demainbray available, and only of his work. The photo is accompanied by a descriptive caption, however, there are no citations. It does not adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

Talk Page Discussion
There are no Talk page discussions.

Overall Impressions
Overall, I think the article is fairly good, although as with anything, it can use some improvement. There are additional sources of information out there available that can enhance the quality and content of the article. The article is on the shorter side, so additional information can and should be added. There is only one photo and it is not cited properly, so that will need to be fixed as well. Beyond these minor revisions, I believe the content available is adequate and gives a good overview of Demainbray's personal and professional life. I believe, for the information available, the article is well-developed.