User:Cooki3monster676/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The Hershey Company

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I like Hershey's products, therefore I thought it would be interesting to learn more about the company. My preliminary thoughts are that the article is slightly disorganized.

Evaluate the article
The lead sections starts off well in the first paragraph, but the next two paragraphs seem slightly disorganized. The information is significant, but it lacks a smooth flow. Also, there is a "failed verification" notice about a source in the second paragraph, which decreases the article's reliability. Most of the information in the lead section is present in the article, besides information about Hershey Creamery Company. This information is only discussed in the lead section and no where else in the article. Overall, the lead section is not overly detailed and contains mostly relevant information.

The content of the article is relevant to the topic. The article has a neutral point of view, but some of the viewpoints could be expanded upon to provide a full view of the information. For example, in the Criticism section of the article, there are no opposing viewpoints represented. Also, there is a source from The Washington Post, which is not the best type of source for a Wikipedia article since it is not peer reviewed. There is also a source directly from a Hershey Company report, which is not a good source for Wikipedia articles. The sources are diverse, however there are better options to use. The links work within the article, but there are some areas for improvement regarding types of reliable sources.

The flow of the article could be improved by using more concise language. It contains the major important sections, however some sections contain significantly more information than others. The shorter sections could be expanded upon to include the correct amount of relevant information. The article includes images, but there is room for improvement. The images included are not the most representative of the information discussed. They are laid out in a visually appealing way, but some images could be replaced with higher quality photos. The caption under the Criticism section does not describe the image shown, therefore should be improved. The other images in the article are captioned well.

On the Talk Page, there are conversations about parts of the article that need to be fixed or adjusted. There was a request to make an audio version of the article, making it part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The article used to be on the "Good Article" list, but it was taken off because there are still improvements to be made. Overall, the article has room for improvement. It includes correct sections that should be in this article, but it needs more development. Some sections are overdeveloped while others are underdeveloped. Only a few sections seem to be completed sufficiently. The article can be improved by using more reliable sources, including multiple viewpoints to avoid persuasion, and using better images to represent the sections they are in.