User:HARA0201/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am going to edit an article on " the Shepherd's Crusade (1320)

Shepherds' Crusade (1320)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am interested in this article because it has a lot of content in it which is very informative and I found some useful information about the Shepherd's Crusade 1320 which I think need to be added to this article so that every one can access it.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is very concise and reflects the entire article although I believe more information can be added to this section. The content of the article is relevant to the topic as the article focuses on the Shepherd's crusade without including any irrelevant information. It is related to the historical struggles of Jews and how they handled those hard circumstances. The article is not trying to persuade the reader but has a neutral tone and presents the information without being biased towards any position. It is well organized into sections and each section has a title which makes it easier to follow and understand the article. It is up to the point and clear enough for the given information to be consumed by the readers. The references are given which supports the information given in the article. It has one picture which relates to the topics that are being discussed in the article because the image represents the focal point which forms the base of the article itself.

In the talk page the Wikipedians has discussed about the title of the article like whether it should have been Shepherd's Crusade of 1320 or just Shepherd's Crusade, 1320.

This article is part of three WikiProjects which are WikiProject Religion/ Interfaith, WikiProject Middle Ages/Crusades, WikiProject Military history.

Overall, the article is well-organized, clear, and concise which makes it easy to understand and strengthens it. However, I think more can be added to the lead section and either a separate section about the success of the crusade can be added or information about their success can also be added to the section with the title" progress" because how crusade succeeded and who supported them can well fit this section.

Also, under the section of Progress, the word " they" is  confusing and not clear enough because the section directly starts by saying, instead they marched, here they can refer to either the Jews or the crusade so I think  the specific word should be mentioned rather than saying "they".

There should be section about what happened to Jews after the crusade and who supported them. This will make the article more informative and interesting.

Some more factors can be added to the "causes" section as there are other factors which are not mentioned there.