User:Chpiedra/Evaluate an Article

Mills v. Board of Education

Which article are you evaluating?
Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Disability rights are incredibly important in every facet of life, but it seems supremely pertinent to ensure that disabled children are treated with kindness and equality because change begins with new generations. If children are denied the right to an education equal to their peers, it has the potential to damage their intellectual capacity and stunt their capabilities as adults. Additionally, it perpetuates the belief that people with disabilities are somehow lesser or considered the "deviance" of neurotypical individuals. This case, Mills v. Board of Education District of Columbia (1972), advocates for the right for all children to receive adequate education, regardless of their financial means, which is incredibly significant given that the outcome was in favor of the disabled community. It advocates for children and parents who did not previously have a voice to ask for help and acknowledgment for them and their child's situation.

Evaluate the article
I think the leading section provides an adequate summary of the case, however the introductory sentence seems a bit repetitive and lacks detail. I would edit the first sentence to add a concise description of what the case was about, rather than restating the obvious. The title of the case itself identifies that it is a case regarding educational rights within the District of Columbia, so that does not need to be repeated. As a replacement introductory sentence, I might instead say "Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia was a class action lawsuit filed against the District of Columbia for failing to ensure equal education among minority children with disabilities." Overall, though, I think that the leading section does an excellent job at briefly summarizing the case and its decision, as well as relating it to future amendments made in favor of disability rights.

The content is relevant and up-to date, however I think the body of the article is much too brief and merely summarizes the key points of the case. It reads as a continuation of the lead section. It does not specify much about the specific legal proceedings, and it fails to mention the case's relevance to Brown v. Board of Education, a landmark case that was used to support and argue Mills v. Board. It touches briefly on the equity gap between individuals with disabilities as compared to neuro-typicals but does not mention race as a factor.

The tone of the article is professional and unbiased, it presents the information in a clear, objective manner. There is no attempt at persuasion, and the author of the article makes an honest attempt to highlight the injustices against the minority disability community, but not the racial indignities of the case.

The sources are length and detailed, they provide a firm understanding of the case and its details, but as this Wikipedia page is just a stub, it references only two sources and covers little more than the highlights of the case. It would benefit from more in-depth research and a more expansive description.

The image included on the page is largely unnecessary and does not add anything to the article as a whole. If one wanted to add useful media to the page, they might consider including a video or audio brief of the case.

Overall, the article is underdeveloped and suffers from a lack of thorough research and is vague in its explanation. It requires much more detail and specificity regarding the case, and it says little about its impact on present-day disability rights.