User:Farrelil/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Postgraduate research

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am interested in this topic as a current graduate researcher, it is important to inform those interested in research about this topic. My first impression of the article is that it is lacking in some information.

Lead section
A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.) Yes
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Content
A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, but some random anecdotes that don't fit
 * Is the content up-to-date? No
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes, there is missing content
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? It does not address any historically underrepresented populations or topics but should.