User:Cwarner2653/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Team 10

(Team 10)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Because the article covers architecture, which is one of my interests as well as something that I am already familiar with. Additionally, Team 10 is a group of architects which I am also somewhat familiar with, thus I see it as good practice as an introduction to evaluating articles.

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.)

The Team 10 Wikipedia article was accurate, but a short and direct read. The article accurately describes the group, however details are limited. Below are some of my remarks and suggestions.


 * The introduction to the article is quite concise and informative, however not very captivating. A sentence or two describing what Team 10 is known for and possibly some some examples of work their members have done or work the group has collaborated on.
 * Perhaps going more in depth about the movements the group were involved in would be insightful. The article seems to very briefly highlights the very basics of what Team 10 is and what they have done.
 * The article itself is very brief and quite uninteresting. There is some content about Team 10 which, while not vital information, could be included and would help the reader gain interest in the topic as well as provide many more answers to the questions some readers may have. The article feels like less of an article and more of definition.
 * The article does write from an extremely neutral viewpoint, which is good for eliminating misinformation, but does not show the qualities nor cons of the group.
 * The article could benefit from more than one picture, possibly of all the members with their corresponding description, or their work. The one picture that has been provided is slightly misleading as it is a photo of the dissolution of the organization CIAM. While the photo does include members of team 10, it also includes many other people. This would not be much of an issue if it weren't the only picture in the article and while it does involve team 10, it does not describe team 10. An image consisting of solely the members of the group or multiple images of the various members would be far more helpful to the readers.
 * The bibliography is expansive, coming from many different books, journals and articles, which appear to be credible. There is one statement which briefly describes the group's accomplishments which goes uncited. I find this peculiar considering it appears to be a summary of the article's content, however the article does not expand on these achievements very much if at all. Perhaps if the article expands further on the group's achievements with footnotes, the claim at the end of the paragraph in summary format would not need a citation. There does seem to be a disproportionate amount of sources in the bibliography compared to the amount of information in the article.

Overall, the article seems to be missing important information on the subject. The information provided, however is direct and unbiased. For the amount of time it takes to read the article (not long at all) I suppose the article is worth the read. Much to be desired in regards to pictures and information about the members however. It would be interesting to see this article expanded upon.