User:Hawks6890/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Political finance

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose the article about political finance because it is a field I myself have great interest in. As an economics and legal studies major, I feel I have a bias to the topic prior to reading it. Before reading the article, I think the topic will cover the allocation of political finances and the expenditures.

Evaluate the article
Overall, the article conveyed lots of information in a non-biased way however, there are a few minor changes I would personally make to the article. Firstly, in the first paragraph of the article, I feel overall it provided a good understanding of what political finances was in general, however, I think talking about the groups that play a role in political finance distracted from defining political finance as a general definition. It would have been more effective if the first paragraph was just a defining body of what political finance was without any examples or factors considering it goes more in depth further down the article. Moreover, in the "Grassroots Fundraising" section of the article it provided lots of unnecessary facts on top of the definition and examples. It would also have been better if grassroot fundraising had its own sentence where there was a clear definition because it would have added context to the examples provided. In similarity, the "Plutocratic Fundraising" section would have been more effective with a clear cut definition to strengthen the rest of the information. Lastly, the "Study of Political Finance" section, although provided fascinating information of the history of political finance, was unnecessary to the article and the section could have been its own article separate from this article. On the talk page of the article, there is very limited conversing going on. However, the one message shared a great point about how political finance as a whole was not talked positively about nor negatively, but it did share the topic from a US point of view for the majority of the article, so inclusion of more outside systems would add a better international view of the entire topic. Wikipedia is talked negatively in school systems due to the ability of potential good articles being edited invalidating everything written within. In contrast, most articles, although edited, have lots of useful information and links to further your understanding on a topic.