User:Eprell/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Politics in education

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 the politics of education is an interesting topic to me and it matters because there are a lot of factors that are often unseen in education. My preliminary impression of this article is that it is short and concise and describes the basics of educational politics.

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 lead of the article provides an introduction to what the article is about. It is concise and doesn't include any detail that is not present in the article. The articles content is relevant to the topic, however the content is almost 20 years old so it is a bit outdated. There isn't any content that doesn't belong or any content missing, but the article could definitely provide more detail. The article is neutral and doesn't provide any viewpoints that aren't strictly factual, and the author does not persuade the reader in either direction. The information presented in the article is backed up by sources, however these sources are outdated. The article is well-written, concise, and easy to read, however the article did not have a main focus or topic. This was mentioned by others on the talk page, as was the lack of detail in the article. The overall status was alright, but the article could definitely use some work with updated facts and more detail.