User:Connorp71/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Chris Bumstead

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this Article because it is a start class article and has a lot that can be added to it. I also am Interested in the topic and the guy himself, he runs a youtube channel and documents his life and the stuff he goes through to be top tier IFBB pro. Bumstead is the 3 year reigning current Mr. Olympia, which is basically the highest level you can achieve in bodybuilding. He has grown a huge following online and is a very genuine person who gives very good advice and insight to people who look up to him.

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

I think the Lead could have a more in depth introductory sentence, although it goes over who he is and what he does, I feel as if it could have gone farther in depth.

The lead only contains information from his adult life, and nothing about his upbringing.

Lead includes everything in Article but is very concise, I think it could have a bit more to it/ be written better

CONTENT

I think the article is Lacking content overall, and puts too much of the weight on his life now opposed to his early life and teenage years.

The content is relevant to the topic, but I believe the contest history could be presented in a much easier and more interesting manner to comprehend, not just a list of which years he won what.

The content is up to date and shows his contest placings as recent as last year.

I think you could add a lot of information concerning his contests, there is no actual info, just facts on which place he took at which years competition. I also think I could add several pieces of information that did not show much importance in the article, ex. autoimmune disease.

Does not have any content to do with Wiki's equity gaps

TONE AND BALANCE

The article is Neutral and does not favor Chris in any way or glorify him, just presents facts.

^^no bias claims

Article never presents things in his favor, or tries to present him in the spotlight.

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

All info in article is backed up by reliable, professional sources and publications. EX. His own site, gymshark (brand sponsor), Muscle & Strength, IFBBpro.com, NPCnewsonline.com

Sources are thorough and provide insight on his life and background through his own first hand accounts.

Diverse spectrum of authors: himself, sponsor, and professional corporation (IFBB)

Since the article has been published, some sources have came out with more in depth and reliable information, and I think I could find a few sources that are more reliable than the current ones.

ORGANIZATION AND WRITING QUALITY

Article is Grammatically correct.

I do not believe the article is very well written, it touches on all the basic topics needed but fails to go in depth and really tell the story of what makes him so great

^^ex. fails to go in depth on contest wins, autoimmune disease, early years, etc.

Not well organized, Fails to give background information in sections, needs to go more in depth in many different parts of the essay

IMAGES AND MEDIA

Article contains no images or captions relating to sections, just writing therefore the info is not very appealing to the eye

TALK PAGE DISCUSSION

There is not much activity in the talk page, it appears that images have been deleted off of the page.

The article is a Start Class article

Article is a part of WikiProjects Ontario and Ottawa

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS

Overall status= start class

Article Strengths:

Provides all basic information needed to comprehend subject

Article Weaknesses:

Needs more supporting info on concepts, some better sources

I think this article is overall very underdeveloped. Introduction could go farther in depth, each part of the article could have a lot more supporting info, not only making the article more reliable, but also giving whoever may come across it a way better read. Nobody wants to read a bland paper that just lists off stats and facts with no elaboration.