User:Cyndhr/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Activist Women's Voices: Activist Women's Voices
 * I have chosen this article to review because I want to know more about organizations that focus on women's experiences and contribution to their communities.

Lead
The Lead includes an introductory sentence that describes the article's topic and and in this case, what the project was about (The Activist Women's Voices). The Lead includes a brief description of some sections but it doesn't highlight all the sections. It only includes information that is present in the article and doesn't have any other information that is not presented in the sections. The Lead is concise, gives a little explanation without being overly detailed.

Content
The article's content was relevant to the topic. In the History section, it provided the methods used, the processing and the funding for the project. It also contained Collection information in which it provides the activists and organizations. The content seems to be up-to-date, it was last edited on October 31, 2020. The content doesn't seem to be missing information, however it does not provide much detail in the sections. It only gives a brief summary of each section.

Tone and Balance


The article is neutral and there didn't have any information that was biased toward a particular position, it just explained the origin of the project. There does not seem to be any viewpoints that are either overrepresented or underrepresented, the information is quite equally presented. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of any position.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Most of the facts appear to be backed up by reliable sources, even though it was a little complicated to get access to some of the sources. Some of the sources took me to a website but it was in another language. Some of the sources where thorough and many of them are also current. The sources and references seem to be written by a diverse spectrum of authors. I checked the links and they all work but some of them are a little complicated to navigate through.

Organization


The article is well-written, it is very concise, clear and easy to read. I just noticed a couple of spelling errors where it was missing an "s" at the end to make it plural. I do however, feel like there many sentences that were very short and that they could've been combined into longer sentences. The article is broken down into sections, briefly and concisely explaining the major points.

Images and Media
The article does not include images to enhance the understanding of the topic. It is lacking images, which should've been added, for example, images of the activists.

Checking the talk page


Through the talk page, there are some conversations in which they talk about expanding the article and providing more examples with clear details about many of the collections. They also talk about how the article is lacking some citations.

Overall impressions
The strengths of this article is the concise formatting and clearly stating facts. However, it can be improved in many ways. For example, it should have more citations, it should also display images and give more information for each section. It seems to be lacking more in depth details in some sections. I think the article underdeveloped because there can be more information that can be added for the reader to grasp a better idea of the topic.