User:Emzrohm/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Reading

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 chose this article because I am interested in studying reading someday, and this article provides a multi-faceted view of the topic. This article is not lacking in content; its a very long article with multiple sections covering different areas of reading.

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.)

The article does a good job in that the lead section gives a general definition of reading and what else it entails. All of the content in this article revolves around these things. If anything, it seems that there is too much content in this article, but it covers everything from the history of reading to the science of reading and the way reading is taught. It would be difficult to make separate articles on these topics alone.

As for tone and balance, the content in this article is pretty neutral and unbiased. The sources are well-balanced and diverse, spanning from the late 1980s to present day. This means that this article is consistently updated to be in line with current information. The use of pictures of minimal, but most of them do not contribute to the article. Most of the conversations in the Talk section of the article are from the early 2010s, and most of the sections they recommended fixing either do not exist in the article anymore or have been fixed.

Overall, this is a very good article; it is extensive and very detailed. Some of the pictures could be removed, but that is the only negative about this article.