User:Domino10101/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Bachelor of Arts

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 selected this article because it describes my field of study, so it is of interest to me. It matters because it may help someone to decide whether to pursue an education in the arts, or to better understand this subject if they are unfamiliar with it. While my initial impression of this article was that it seemed fairly complete, since it contains a lot of information, I soon realized that it was missing many citations, making it unreliable and incomplete.

Evaluate the article
This article's lead does include a proper introductory sentence. However, it does not briefly describe the article's major sections, and it includes information that is not present in the article. This information is also overly detailed.

The content of this article is relevant and up to date. It does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

The article is neutral, and does not appear to present any information from a biased position. Viewpoints are not over- or under-represented, and the article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of any particular position.

Not all the information in this article is cited, and some citations do not actually appear to back up the information they are supposed to prove. While the articles do come from a variety of sources, they do not include marginalized individuals. In addition to this, one of the links does not work. A better source might be, for example, Matthew Rose's 2015 peer reviewed article, "The Liberal Arts and the Virtues: A Thomistic History."

This article is well-written, with no grammatical or spelling errors. While it is well-organized, some of the sections contain much less information than others, despite being equally as important.

This article only has one image, although it does increasing understanding of the topic, is laid out in a visually appealing way, and is well-captioned. Unfortunately, the image does not adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

Some discussions occurred recently on this article's talk page, which seem to be focused on increasing understanding of the topic. This article is also related to a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, and has been worked on by a student.

Overall, it seems like there is still work to be done on this article, but that it is starting to become more developed. Its strengths are its organization, scope, and relevance. Some ways that it can be improved are by finding more credible sources, and filling in sections that are lacking information. I think it is both underdeveloped and poorly developed, but that with a bit of work it can be neither.

Feedback
Good work! Chronophoto (talk) 17:43, 21 September 2023 (UTC)