User:Ejgclemson/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Herta Regina Leng

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because it focuses on a female scientist that was recognized and celebrated for the work she contributed to her field. Initially, I had no preexisting information about Herta Leng before reading this article so I had no expectations prior to evaluating it.

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.)

Overall, the article is very short and therefore each of the sections leaves something to be desired as they would have been more effective in including more information. The article could be improved by just being added to and getting more information contributed to it.

Lead Section: Did include a well written introductory sentence that was effective in opening the article, however it did not address the rest of the subheadings that were present and then provided some information about Herta Leng's personal life that possibly would have been more effective in its own section, as it did not seem to correlate much to other information in the article or provide a connected set-up for the article as it was placed in the introduction.

Content: The content provided about Leng is definitely relevant and informative. It is fairly concise and well written, though it contains complicated information that is difficult to read in those longer sentences. It may have been helpful to break it up more in order to make it easier to read and flow more smoothly. It is also definitely very neutral and does not hold any biased opinions, so it does not reference any specific points of view concerning a topic.

References: The sources are thorough and there are a healthy amount of them, although most are not current. There are several primary sources that are from Herta Leng's own lifetime and so those are definitely valid, however other sources are over 10 years old and therefore could do with a little bit of updating.

Images: There is one image present in the article that does effectively contribute to it and is properly cited so it is a good inclusion.

Talk Page: There are no existing discussions from authors, the talk page only holds messages from wikipedia, that it is part of WikiProject Women Scientists which focuses on providing more coverage on women in science. It is also part of another WikiProject, WikiProject Biography which seeks to provide more information on historically significant figures.