User:Emro12/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Mascot Hall of Fame

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I really enjoy watching sports and thought it would be interesting to learn more about their mascots. The mascot hall of fame is important because it represents the famous characters and their impact on fans. I thought this article was displayed nicely with a chart listing the mascot, organization, location, description, sport, division, and when it was inducted. Pictures were also included which was a great and helpful visual.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is well-written and includes an introductory sentence that states the formal name of the Mascot Hall of Fame. This is a short article so the introduction did not really outline the coming sections as there were only four paragraphs total. The lead section is a little overly detailed. It goes into the history of the Mascot Hall of Fame; this should be a content paragraph instead of in the introduction.

The content of the article is relevant to the topic. It discusses how the mascots are selected and how one can be inducted. The next paragraph talks about the mission of the Mascot Hall of Fame. The last paragraph was the requirements for how to be eligible for the Mascot Hall of Fame.. Also included in the content section, is a chart of the inductees as well as pictures of some of the mascots.

The article is neutral since there really isn’t a side to take on this topic. This means there are no claims that are heavily biased or viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented. There are no minority viewpoints. Finally, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader any which way.

The only facts that are cited are in the introduction section. This is concerning because we don’t know where the author got the rest of the content. The sources are relatively current: two were updated in 2017 and one was written in 2018. All of the links in the references work, however, two of them require a subscription to read them.

Overall, the article was well-written, easy to read, and concise. There were no grammatical or spelling errors. The chart and images were a great visual. The images had accurate captions and are appealing in how they are presented.

On the talk page, nothing new is being talked about. The most recent comment is from 2013. Some things talked about are Mr. Met being inducted (2007), listing the inductees in alphabetical or date or induction (2008), and  a question regarding the 2009 Hall of Fame inductees (2009), which was answered in 2013.

Like stated before, a strength of this article is the chart and pictures. These things make it easier to grasp the information shared. The article could be more descriptive and factual as well as cite more sources. All in all, this is a slightly underdeveloped article because it has only a brief background section.