User:Delaney555/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Social work

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because social work is a career that related to psychology. In class we talked about how this is a career path someone with a psychology degree might be interested in. I wanted to learn more about social work because maybe this could be a career I am interested in pursuing after I graduate. I did know some stuff about social work, but I was hoping this article would teach me more. Because I have an idea of what social work is I felt like I could evaluate the article well. When I first clicked the article I saw it had a lot of information. I read all of the subheading to know about what the article would be covering. I also noticed it had a long list of sources which is a good sign.

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.)

When first accessing the article about social work I do believe the lead section did fantastic job at defining what social work is and gave a brief overview of what the article would be discussing. I do not believe the lead section was too long. If I was in a rush and just needed a quick answer the lead section would be perfect. The content of the article was relevant to the subject of social work. I did not find any content that did not belong either. The information did not seem outdated and the page was last edited today. The tone and balance was neutral. There was no biased viewpoints. After reading through the sources, I believe this article had its information come from reliable sources. I believe the sources did come from a diverse rage of authors. The links I clicked in the resources section did take me to the source. The article was well organized and I did not find any grammar errors. The article was well written and easy to follow in my opinion. This article only had 2 images. The images were captioned well and went with the information being provided. The first picture was a very dated picture of a social worker providing services to a family. I feel like the article should have more updated photos of social workers and have a couple more photos. In the talk section some of the users were suggesting changes or talking about some edits that could be done. Other users just had some questions about social work. The article was a nominee for a Good article but needed some improvements. This article is apart of 2 WikiProjects. The 2 projects are WikiProject Social Work and WikiProject Medicine. The article could have a conflict of interest because a user has a connection to social work. My overall impression is that the article did tell me what social work is and gave a lot of information about the history of social work. I do not personally believe that the article needs improvement other than maybe including a couple more photos. While the article did have a conflict of interest I need not find any bias in the article. Lastly, I do think that the article was well-developed and I do not believe it is lacking anything major.