User:FilthyAtFive/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Humanities

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
It was the first article on the Academic disciplines category to catch my eye, the topic is very relevant to my course, and my initial impression is that this is an article will the valuable information.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: This was one of the stronger parts of the article. Introductory sentence described the topic, sections within the article were presented in the second paragraph, and the information was thorough without being verbose.

Content: Majority of the content was useful and pertained to the topic of the article, there were just a few statements that didn't seem to belong but I'll cover that in the tone section. The content was last updated earlier this month and all of the information relates to the subject of humanities.

Tone and Balance: There were quite a few instances in the article where a statement came off as quite a bit opinionated. These statements all had "dubious-discuss" marked on them, and all of the marked statements did not have a source cited. This only happens in certain sections, with most of the controversial information being at the end of a paragraph which makes me think these are being added recently.

Sources and References: This was another problem with the article. Entire sections did not have a single source cited, but the majority had an appropriate amount. The editing on this page seems very divided from section-to-section, making the read not feel as credible since there are a quite a few instances of information being written down without a source, statements saying things like "many experts agree.." without providing names, and claims that come off as very subjective or trying to push an idea to sway people a certain direction.

Organization and writing quality: The article looks very well organized and the information that is there is thoroughly explained with plenty of examples. The only downside is that the content doesn't seem as credible with sections not having sources and controversial claims.

Images and Media: All the images are relevant to the topic, add quality, have captions, and are organized in a presentable fashion.

Talk page discussion: The conversations in the Talk page discuss changing the tone of the article to not convey wrong messages or seem biased. The three sections being discussed are: Anthropology, Postmodernism, and Humanistic theories and practices. It is a part of 10 different WikiProjects and is rated of very high importance to nearly all of them.

Overall impressions: The page contains a lot of useful information and is very well organized, it just needs polishing. The consistency of sourcing and citations across the sections should be uniform, and any claims that are biased or subjective should be deleted or cited as a claim from a source that is of use to the content in this article.