User:Jamiehoward27/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Smeg (appliances)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Smeg is a well-known appliance brand, with a distinct look and loyal customer base. I expected their wikipedia article to be lengthly and provide me with abundant information but was underwhelmed by it.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The intro section consists of only "Smeg is an Italian home appliance manufacturer.". There is no description present of the articles major sections, and not enough information for a reader who wants a brief overview to learn anything more about the company within the first paragraph. There is not any information that is not present in the article, and the introduction is very concise but due to a lack of information.

Content: The content that is present does not appear to be problematic, although there is a lack of sources. All information is relevant to the company. The information is not up to date, there are many awards the company has received since the one listed in the article from 2010. There is a lot of missing content, just from a quick look at the Smeg website there are relevant topics such as sustainability and products that are not included in the article. There are no blatant wikipedia equity gaps to my knowledge.

Tone and Balance: The article is written from a neutral point of view, without the author trying to sway the reader in any way.

Sources and references: Many facts in the article are not backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. The sources are also not thorough and not the most updated ones available. Only a small section of the company's official website, which is a reliable source of information, is used at any point in the article. There are also a number of scholarly articles on Smegs innovation and products, none of which the article cites. One of the links for a source cited does not work, and the article states at the top that "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject", which is problematic.

Organization and writing quality: The article is well written, is very concise and clear. There are no grammatical or spelling errors. It is well-organized, but is lacking flow between the various sections.

Images and media: The article only includes one image, and it does enhance understanding of the topic but shows a very small range of what the topic includes. The image has a caption but it is not very descriptive and is missing key identifying information. The image adheres to copyright guidelines, the major issue is the lack of further images, including larger images and a variety in the type of images included in the article.

Talk page discussion: This article has been submitted for “speedy deletion” multiple times. Editors agree that the article reads like an advertisement, is lacking information and is very UK centered.

Overall: This article needs to be expanded and brought up to date. There is not a great deal of misinformation presented, but there is an overall lack of information and expansion of the topics presented.