User:Demellozach2/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Daddy's Roommate

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it provides an insight to those children who don't understand what it's like to go through a divorce. It later describes what it's like for a child to live in a household with his father's significant other and how he's going to have to adjust to the changes.

Evaluate the article
The article about Daddy's Roommate provides a very concise introductory sentence which introduces that topic that's going to be discussed in the article. There doesn't appear to be a description of each section that will be later discussed, but there is a list of content in bullet points. While reading the lead, I looked throughout the whole article to see if anything was said in the lead that wasn't discussed in the article. I found that the lead is very consistent to what was initially introduced at the start.,The lead provides everything that needs to be introduced before reading the article, nothing more and nothing less.

The content that is discussed in the article about Daddy's Roommate is consistent with what the children's book is about, and the content introduced is up to date. I wouldn't say there is any content missing but there is a lack of cohesion and the summary that is provided in wikipedia doesn't seem to offer an extensive amount about what the book is about, only a very short summary. There doesn't appear to be anything that isn't supposed to be there, but I fee like a 30 page short story should have a much longer summary than the one that is presented on the Wikipedia page. This article does deal with one of WIkipedia's equity gaps since its directly referencing the LGBTQ community.

The article is written in a neutral point of view, and there doesn't appear to be any bias towards a particular position on the LGBTQ community. Under the controversy section, I think the information provided is underrepresented and that there is more that can be said about the about certain states views on the short story. This article doesn't attempt to persuade the reader towards a certain point of view, but instead it provides factual information.

All the facts in this article is backed up by a reliable thorough sources, and these sources are relatively current be written within the last 5 to 10 years. The sources provided are written by a vast array of different authors offering their perspective on the short story.

This article is concise, well-written, and doesn't contain any glaring errors but its still can be improved upon. The article is very organized because all the information is broken down into specific sections for the reader to navigate. Also, there doesn't seem to be any spelling or grammatical errors after reading it thoroughly.

This particular Wikipedia article contains one image and its of the cover of the book, and the image is well captioned with all the necessary information. The image also adheres to wikipedias copyright regulations and I feel it could be laid out in a more aesthetically appealing manner.

The conversations that go on in the talk page are about whether this book is appropriate for young children to read since it conveys controversial topics such as gay-marriage. The article was rated as stub. The way that the wikipedia article differs from what we've discussed in class is that there is no bias on wikipedia pages, so people can't really voice their own personal opinion.

Overall, this article is well-written and information provided is consistent to the sources it utilizes. The summary of the short story could be more in depth and the information can be added controversy section. The article I would say is well-developed but just needs to be altered a little so that the reader can get everything out of reading this page.