User:Isand4/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loveless_(album)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I like this album. I thought the article did this album justice.

Evaluate the article
Conciseness, brevity, and succinctness all characterize the lead section of the Wikipedia article on Loveless, My Bloody Valentine’s second studio album. The article’s topic is clear from the beginning, as the introductory sentence explicitly informs the reader of the article's subject. What follows is a brief  summary of important information related to the album. The lead includes what a good Wikipedia lead needs, namely a description of the article’s major sections. Additionally, the lead is concise in its delivery. After evaluating this article, I believe that the content is relevant to the article’s topic. In addition, the content is up to date. This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps. The article does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics. Though impartiality is difficult to find in art, this Wikipedia article manages to present the topic in as objective a manner as one can hope for. The section detailing the critical reception faced by the Loveless pulls from reviews published in several different, reputable publications. The article also details the many accolades and awards received by My Bloody Valentine for their work on Loveless. This article consistently cites reputable, relevant sources. The sources cited reflect the available literature surrounding My Bloody Valentine and their work on Loveless. The article uses current sources where it is appropriate. Because this article is on an album released in 1991, it is reasonable to expect sources to range in their publication date. The article cites a variety of primary and secondary sources. Of the sources cited, I find excerpts from interviews to be the most elucidating and interesting, as they allow for a greater understanding of the work from the perspective of the artist. The links that I checked did work. The article is organized well. The article is sensibly broken down into several categories, each thorough in detail, yet concise and clear. I was not able to identify grammatical or spelling errors, which is what I expected. The collective ability of Wikipedia editors to come together to create is impressive. The article includes images that enhance the understanding of the topic. Each image is attached to a caption that adequately explains the relation of the image to the content of the article. The article also includes media beyond only images. All the media I viewed was helpful and certainly adhered to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. This article’s talk page has seen use throughout the 2000’s and 2010’s. The article is not part of any WikiProjects. Overall, this is a strong, complete, well-developed article. I hope to model my work on my assigned Wikipedia page after the work done on strong Wikipedia articles, such as this one.