User:Heise123/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I’m evaluating Anne Aly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Aly

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it seemed interesting. I wanted to evaluate an article in the social sciences, specifically women in the social sciences. It matters because this is a interesting field that deserves more attention.

Evaluate the article
Lead section

The lead section did provide an inductor sentence that summarize the topic. It said that Anne Aly is an Australian politician in the Labor party in the House of Representatives. It does include a brief description of article major articles. It does not include information that is not present in the article. The lead section is very concise and gives the gist of what the article is going to be about.

Content

The article’s content is relevant to the topic. It talks about her early life and how she eventually got elected to her role in the Australian government. The content is up to date since 2019. There is missing content on what she is currently doing now. I feel this article deals with Wikipedia equity gaps because it talks about a woman in the political sphere, which is underrepresented.

Tone and Balance

This article is neutral. Ally went through traumatic events as a politician, and the article explained in a way that was not biased in her favor or the opposition’s favor. I feel all viewpoints were represented equally in this paper. The article did not try to persuade the audience to pick one side or another.

Sources and References

The facts for this article are backed by reliable sources. A lot of them are Australian news sites, like The Sydney Morning Herald and ABC Radio National. There are also articles and books from Curtin University as sources. These sources are not current. The most current source is from 2015. Updating these sources will be room for improvement. The authors of these sources are mostly men, so adding sources from diverse authors would make this article better. There could be more peer-reviewed articles in the sources, as most are from new sites. All the links work.

Organization and writing quality

The article is well-written and concise. It talks about her early life, education, and career, which are all relevant. There are no grammatical or spelling errors. The article is also well organized.

Images and Media

There is only one image, which is a picture of Anne Ally. There are no captions, but because it’s the only picture of her, I don’t think it needs a caption. Pictures of Ally in various settings would add to this article. The image does adhere to the Wikipedia copyright rules.

Talk page discussion

There are no conversations on the talk page. The article was rated as C class. It is part of WikiProject Biography, Australia, and Women. This Wikipedia article is different because it talks about a woman in social science and what she has done, opposed to epigenetics and its mechanisms.

Overall impressions

The article’s status is overall fair. Its strengths are in its explanation on what Ally did in her life and its neutrality. The article can be improved by adding more diverse sources, adding more pictures, and updating on what Ally is doing currently. The article is complete as it is right now.