User:Hey2023/Evaluate an Article

I chose this article because we talked a little bit about the red scare in class. Lead section: - The lead section does describe the articles topic. - The lead section includes almost every big sections. - The lead does not include information that isn't presented. - The lead is concise. Content: - The articles content is relevant - The article is up to date. - No, they have the content that is in the lead section. - No, the article doesn't deal with one equity gaps. Tone and balance: - The article is neutral. - No, there are not any claims that are based toward any position. - I feel like the New Red Scare wasn't talked about very much. - No, their viewpoints aren't. - No, the article doesn't persuade the reader. Sources and references: - Not all the facts are backed up by another source. - All sources are thorough. - There is a mix between how old and how new the sources are. - Yes, the sources are written by different diverse spectrums. - Yes, but there are good sources used in the article. Organization and writing quality: - Yes, the article is well written. - No spelling errors. - The article is broken into enough sections for the topics. Images and Media: - Yes, there are images that help you understand some topics more. - Yes, all pictures are captioned. - Yes, all images do adhere to copyright regulations. - Images are laid out in an appealing way. Talk page discussion: - like moving sentences or just getting rid of the sentences in general - This article is part of Wikiprojects. - This article goes more in depth with the topic. Overall impressions: - The overall status pf the article is good. - The articles strengths are the amount of information in the article. - The article can be improved with having more up to date information about the red scare. - The article is between well-developed and underdeveloped.