User:Catluvr456/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
History of art criticism

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this particular article to evaluate because I am deeply interested in art, especially the history of it. Learning the history of art while evaluating it would make reading more interesting and engaging. My preliminary impression of the article is that it is well written, with a plethora of given resources and citations, and it looks to hold a great amount of information.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The lead begins with a concise and clear introduction of the topic. The writer expresses what the reader is about to read by introducing them to what the topic is about through given examples. However, after reading through the first two paragraphs, the content becomes a little more heavy and detailed. This can be problematic for a reader as they can be overwhelmed with the information given.

Content: The content of the article holds great information that are useful. The article talks about how the different aesthetics from different eras and highlights their techniques and/or technological advances through an organized timeline of events. Most of the information are up-to-date as well.

Tone and Balance: The article's overall tone is neutral. The article does not in any way attempt to lead the reader into a certain way of thinking nor does it seem biased about a certain way of how to properly "critique" art.

Sources and References: Most facts are backed up with a reliable source such as academic articles and written books. The most recent citation would be from a book written in 2006. However, under the citation of #8, the link appears to be broken or invalid, which is a problem as there is no evidence to support the fact.

Organization and writing quality: The article is written quite well, however my problem with it is that it uses many jargons that somebody who does not study "art criticism" could find difficult to read. Another thing about the article is that the introductory paragraphs are very long which results to losing the reader's attention.

Images and Media: The article's use of images of the different people who were known for their art criticism allows the readers to visualize not only the era but to see a reoccurring pattern--older caucasian men. The images used are laid out neatly and is quite high definition as well. The article does not fail in their use of media.

Talk page discussion: There is not much discussions in the talk page other than a praise for how well the article was cited, which is rightfully deserved. The article has been rated C-Class under the quality scale.

Overall impressions: The article is written quite well with lots of helpful information and is properly cited. My only critique would be avoiding wordy sentences and using jargons as it lost me a bit while I was reading. Other than that, the article was great!