User:JJ415/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Free university

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Following the categories I saw on Wikipedia, I found this article about Free University in different part of the world, and I thought this is an interesting topic. It's great to see that there are several free universities around the world that teach people knowledge for free and do not define who can teach or learn.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

This article gives me a clear definition at the beginning of what is a Free University and it is up-to-date(last edited on 18 January 2024, at 04:44). The topic is clear and concise. The overall content is related to its topic. Its length is not very long, making it convenient for everyone to read, and the summary is also concise and to the point. The article is neutral, I don't see any bias in it. It just gives us an explanation of what free University is and give us some examples. There are three references in this article, but two of them come from the same bibliography. So I think the author could use more references. And the other link leads me to a non-working website in Russian language(this is a little bit confusing). The article is well-organized and written, very easy to understand. But there are no image in the article. The discussion page is inactive. Overall, the article looks good to me. It has a nice and clear structure, concise and easy-to-understand content. But I think the author can work on the references and the outside links provided, make sure that he could include more than one bibliography to reference and make sure the outside link is still working. As a result, I think this article is underdeveloped, there are still some spaces for improvement.