User:CleanBean/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating an article on Sleepwalking (Sleepwalking)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to review this article because of a recent interest I have developed. It is still such a mystery to all and that factor keeps me interested; there are still many things to discover about sleepwalking.

Evaluate the article
With the limited amount of knowledge I had of this topic, I read this article with the intention of learning something new. The introductory paragraph did a good job describing what sleepwalking is and during what stage of sleep, it's more prominent in. The lead section was straightforward and gave enough information to gain general knowledge. In view of the basic descriptions given, the lead did not propose the different topics that will be spoken about later on.

The article had even distributions of information given in different topics. Each section dove deeper into the known analysis of sleepwalking and how its knowledge progressed over the years. The article presented the reports in an even and neutral tone; almost like a professor/teacher presenting a new topic/lesson to their class. It had the feeling of reading a book about sleepwalking and all that's been discovered about it. It doesn't try to argue why one theory is more plausible than the other. It simply presents both sides and positively describe how and why those theories had evolved.

The citations provided are a mix of old and recent studies performed on sleepwalking. The diversity in the resources, allowed the article to have a sense of "flow" throughout it. It allows the reader to know of previous research along with being updated by recent ones. Embedded links and citation links still work and direct you to an appropriate page, if you seek more information or validation. The article is written well, but some sentences extend beyond their limits and are a little difficult to read. These sentences aren't used commonly, but can be spotted throughout. The organization gives the reader enough material that is digestible; lots of information fed in small portions. The images used in the article do not take away nor contribute the article's ability to convey information.

At the time of this review, the Talk page is silent but scrolling through, it seems that it was very active in the developing stages. Many users had made contributions and suggested different kinds of editing, some of which have been kept. Everyone seemed respectful of each other's ideas and contributions. Overall, I really enjoyed this article. It is well-developed, but also has some room for improvement. It has a great way of reporting facts in sections that are easy to understand. And now with this newly obtained knowledge, I am really interested in current research and findings of sleepwalking.