User:Ems1559/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Stella Abidh

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.)

The lead section is quite short considering the debt of the rest of the information. The lead section contains information on Stella Abidh's prior education and achievements however it does not outline what the article is going to cover. All of the information presented in this article is both relevant and necessary when providing a description about the life and accomplishments of Stella Abidh. None of the information is out of date considering there is new information posted from recent years. The article has a plethora of information outlining her education, but lacks information outlining her achievements and what makes her such a credible scientist. This article lacks images as well as any visuals that relates to Stella Abidh. On the talk page, only one conversation exists from 2019. A user simply wrote that he fixed some citations. Considering there is only one edit in the talk page and it was 4 years ago, this article could use some new editing and information to make it better.

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.)

None of the information in this article distracted me considering it was all relevant to the topic. This article seems unbiased considering it is small, a lot of the article consists of merely facts that can not have many perspectives attached to it. All of the links for the article work and are relevant and reliable. The majority of the sources used are to further evaluate on what something is or where it is located. The sources however do not come from a diverse group of authors because the 11 sources used only come from 4 different authors. When editing this article it will be important to implement new perspectives from other research. On the talk page, only one conversation exists from 2019. A user simply wrote that he fixed some citations. Considering there is only one edit in the talk page and it was 4 years ago, this article could use some new editing and information to make it better.