User:Gaving01/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Dead Sea Scrolls

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because of its significance and its correlations to the middle east and the Jewish and Hebrew religions. the reason this article matters and why i chose it it because of its historical date of creation with being included with the Hebrew bible. My preliminary expression of this article is his a fairly long article with good reason because of its historical footprint it puts itself in with the early religions like Judaism.

Evaluate the article
The lead section in this wikipedia article can be separated into a few parts. The first being that the introductory sentence thoroughly describes the overview of what the article is about and does not go into too much detail for what an introductory sentence should be. The second part of the lead section which underlies what the article's main and most important things that the article contains is for the most part pretty thorough for what the first paragraph should be. The third part being the first section of the article or the overview of what the entire article is going to be covering is decently concise with a few parts that seem to be a bit overly detailed for the section of the article it is in.

This article is a fairly long article when it comes to wikipedia but that also comes with the topic that is being addressed, the topic of this article is not a minor one at all, the amount of significance, religious, and political impact and historical perspectives that this article could have taken could be astronomical. But in the end this article seems to keep true to what is is talking about. There are in fact some inadequacies to the article being that in certain parts of the article it claims their are "some scholars" and "several modern scholars", but afterwards does not list who those scholars are within the article itself but to find these scholars you have to click on the references provided within the text. On top of those very few moments within the article there are a few discrepancies within the reference section of the links, of which being that some of the links do not go to anything in other words being dead links, so the information that is being conveyed with those links in the article should be nullified.

The writing quality and organization of the article all seem to be adequate for being unbiased and not opinionated. The article is easy to taking into account the length of the article and the organized is on point as well being as long as it is the organization of the talking points makes the article very easy to navigate and understandable when reading throughout, also very few if any grammatical errors appear throughout the article.When looking at the talk page of the article their seems to some very conflicting views on certain parts of the article most notably the "state of Palestine" between editors and if the the state of Palestine, was really the state of Palestine at the time of discovering the Dead Sea Scrolls.

As for any article on Wikipedia their is always room for more to be written but as for the completeness I think there is a lot more work that needs to be done when it comes to the accuracy on the conflicted argument when it comes to the "state of Palestine" part in the talk page. As well as for some major look-over when it comes to the reference and source section to make sure the links that are being provided actual work and provide the information being talked and written about within the article itself.