User:Eurydice07/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Psyche (mythology)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I love Greek mythology involving the gods, and I love tragic stories like this. I think the article is strong, but I'd like to make it better.

Evaluate the article
- The Lead: The lead is good and concise. I think reference to the story that Psyche is known for, "The Golden Ass", should have a little more context added to it, since this article doesn't mention the story past this reference.

-The Content: The content here is good, although again, I think it should include some discussion of Psyche's role in the Golden Ass. The rest of the information is good, but I would also add some more context to what the Greek's defined as "soul", just to be clear on what her role as a goddess was.

- Tone and balance: the tone of this article is solid. It's a fairly simple topic, which means it doesn't struggle with trying to articulate multiple viewpoints, although if historians disagree on her mythos, it would be nice to include. I think it would also be nice to include some context to Psyche's daughter, Hedone.

- Sources: the sources in this article are also pretty solid, although with more information, more sources would be helpful. The links I've checked all seem to still be working, so the sources are up to date (or at least still active and valid).

- Organization and writing quality: I honestly really like the writing quality of this article; i feel like a lot of times wikipedia articles come across way too academic in tone and therefore are hard to read and comprehend, but this was the perfect balance of academic and normal speak. Again, I think more information should be included.

- Images and media: The images used here are interesting and give great references to Psyche as a person and a mythological figure. They're all up to wikipedia's copyright standards.

- Talk page: there is almost no discussion happening on this site, but it is a part of the Wikiproject mythology.

- Overall impressions: this article is good and informative, but I think with some tweaks it could be an extremely strong and informative piece. It's interesting, both in its writing and content, but with some more detail it could be fantastic.