User:Cbohacek/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Leadership studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I initially chose this article because the title "Leadership studies" relates to the focus and subject of my Masters in Educational Leadership Program. This article matters because it focuses on the key aspects of being a leader, can help readers understand why Leadership studies is a subject at graduate degree level, and how it emerged as a field of study. My preliminary impression of this article is that it was going to be very interesting and insightful.

Cbohacek (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section: The article has a strong Lead section because it explains the definition of what "Leadership studies" is and means in both a practical and career based sense, and introduces the topic as an academic subject of discipline. The Lead section does not seem catered to one specific view point, instead it seems to contain supported factual information and also links related Wikipedia pages that are of importance to the topic of this article.

Content: The article has multiple sections relating to different elements of "Leadership studies" as a subject. Although the article seems to mention well-rounded information for each section to capture the multifaceted-ness of the subject, the majority of the dates mentioned in the article fall between the 1940's-1990's, which seems as though the information is not entirely up to date. Along with giving information regarding the discipline and associated research and programs, the article provides names of specific leaders as well.

Tone and Balance: The tone and writing style of the article seem consistent for the duration of the written piece. Although the article represents the importance and positive elements about "Leadership studies" it does not seem to push this view too much or come off opinionated. It just seems to emphasize its importance as a subject.

Sources and References: There seems to be many footnote citations within the article, although not in every paragraph as we have learned in Wikipedia training is important. There are also many imbedded links to take the reader to other Wikipedia articles dedicated to the topic mentioned in the body of the article. There is also a references page at the bottom of the article. It seems as though many sources are from before 2015 which raises questions as to how up-to-date this information is. There are some links for books that redirect to the Amazon ordering page for that source which I have never seen before in a citation. Upon checking a few links, they did direct to a page on the internet and appear to be active. Many sources seem to come from scholarly institutions and are from many different authors, not just many sources from one author.

Organization and Writing Quality: The article is clear and easy to read. It is also organized into subsections which breaks down topics within the greater subject effectively. It does not seem to have any spelling or grammar errors that are highly visible.

Images and Media: There are no images on the article page, solely written text and links.

Talk page discussion: This article's Talk page mentions it is a part of WikiProject Business in which is was rated in the middle and WikiProject Education in which it was rated low. It also says Shenandoah University participated in this article.

Overall Impressions: This article is interesting because of its organization and variety of information and sources used on a fairly broad topic, which seems as though it is developed. It can be improved by added more current information that is more up-to-date.

Cbohacek (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)