User:Devthaker1910/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Justin Bieber

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am a huge fan of Justin Bieber. I think I have a sufficient amount of knowledge about his career. Hence, I can efficiently evaluate this article.

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.)

Lead section
A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly describes the article's topic. The lead section starts with the full name of Justin Bieber which concisely describes the article's topic as the article is about Justin Bieber.
 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, the lead includes a brief description of all the major sections of the article starting from a brief introduction about the artist followed by brief information about how his career started and acknowledgement of his work. However, there is no information or acknowledgement about the deluxe edition of his album Justice, which was release a few days after the original album of released. On the top of that, nothing is mentioned about his latest extended play album called 'freedom', which was released yesterday, 4th April, 2021.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
 * No, the lead does not include any information that is not present in the article. Everything that is included in the lead is further mentioned in detail.
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead section includes only brief information about the topic of the article, which is sufficient to provide an overview of the article to the reader. Hence, the lead is concise.

Content
A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content is up-to-date, also including about the latest releases of the artists and his achievements.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes, the article does not acknowledge about the deluxe edition of the artist's new album justice as well as his latest extended play album 'freedom', which was released on 4th April, 2021.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No, the article doesn't deal with Wikipedia's equity gaps.

Tone and Balance
Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.


 * Is the article from a neutral point of view?
 * Yes, the article is written from a neutral point of view. Almost half of the articles consists of the timelines of his career and facts about his work. There's nothing written in a biased manner which can certainly change the viewpoint of the reader.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, there are no such claims that appear heavily biased to a particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, there are no such viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented.
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * Yes, minority viewpoints are described accurately and briefly, such as, viewpoint about his personal life.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, the article is written from a neutral point of view, mostly consisting of facts about his career and his achievements. Hence, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of any position. However, some reader can find the article overwhelming as the article is highly populated by information about his achievements and career milestones that he has achieved, which can influence some readers.

Sources and References
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, all the facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. Most of these sources are from news coverage, public interviews and verified websites such as billboard and IMDB.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No, these sources are not thorough as most of the sources are extracted from news coverage, different articles and interviews
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, some of the sources are current and some of the sources are from the past based on the timeline of the information.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No, the sources are not written by diverse spectrum of authors.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites?
 * No, there are no better sources available, such as peer reviewed articles. The best source in this case can be the artists own website https://www.justinbiebermusic.com/ and news coverage.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links work properly.

Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the article is well-written. It is concise, clear and easy to read. Additionally, the article is written from a neutral point of view.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, the article does not have any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, the article is well organized. The major points of the topic are broken down into sections which are further broken down into multiple sections wherever necessary. On the top of that, the article is written in a chronological order.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, the article includes few images that enhance the understanding of the topic. However, most of the images are from the past. Hence, I think few current images must be added to the article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, all the images are well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, all the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No, the images are laid out in a simple manner, without any editing.

Talk page discussion
The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are different types of conversations going on behind the scenes. For example, some conversations are about adding substantial information to the part about Lyme disease, some conversations are about using a new lead picture, considering the current one is 4 years old.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is nominated for music good articles, but did not meet the good article criteria. This is because this article must adhere to biography of living person policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Additionally, this article is a part of multiple WikiProjects.

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is written with a neutral point of view, with viewpoints supported by multiple sources. Hence, the article is thorough but the article does not adhere to Wikipedia's biography of a living person policy.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The main strengths of this article are-- The article is written with a neutral point of view without any heavily biased views and the all the facts in the articles are well-sourced.
 * How can the article be improved?'
 * The article can be improved by editing it according to all the Wikipedia policies. On the top of that, information about the artist's new releases which I mentioned earlier should be added to the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I would the say that the article is well-developed and well organized. With the hep of a little editing, the article can fall into the criteria of good article.