User:Jazz.DeBoer/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Talk:Artistic gymnastics

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am a really big fan of the sport of gymnastics. When I first looked at this article I got the impression that while it was a good start it could be improved.

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.)

LEAD

The lead section of this article is a very good one. It gives a great preview to many of the main points that are in the article and shows no bias. I do feel that the part where they are talking about it being a popular spectator sport is unnecessary for the intro of the article.

CONTENT

This article looks to be complete but I can not be completely sure of this. I would have to do more research to really know if something is missing from the article. many of the sections had no cited sources which makes it hard to determine if all of the information is verifiable. This makes it seem like the article is not finished. I feel on the competition format, they could add a little more information on this topic or take it out since it is so small and does not have a lot of information to go with it.

TONE AND BALANCE

While looking through the comments there were a couple that suggested the article was biased towards the United States. However, while reading it, it does not seem to be biased towards the U.S. and I could see the change in it. It seems to have a good balance other than that some parts of the article have a lot more information than others.

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

There are not enough references in all of the sections of the articles. Reference 1 seems to be a good and reliable source. It is from a book and while it is printed in Great Britain I think it is a good source because the article is not just talking about one country. The sources that were on the article seem to be very reliable. They are not from websites that could be hard to verify the information. The information mostly came from books which are proven to be reliable sources because they are fact checked.

ORGANIZATION AND WRITING QUALITY

I think the writing quality was done very well. I could not find any grammatical errors in the writing and it seems to be done very well. I think the organization was a little weird with all of the pictures breaking it up and the way the events were done.

IMAGES AND MEDIA

I think that the images are a little distracting. There are so many of them all throughout the article and since it seems to be in the middle of the article it can be very distracting. I do appreciate the fact that they used a variety of athletes and pictures that are from different times throughout the sport.

TALK PAGE DISCUSSION

The talk page discussion is talking about some errors throughout the article. It seems like the writers have tried to fix some of the things that were said to be biased. They proposed some changes to the article and some information that they think would be good to add to the article. It seems that they had to remove a link to a reference because it went off the topic of artistic gymnastics. There was also some talk about a wiki project where they provided a link to talk and work on it.

OVERALL IMPRESSION

My overall impression of the article is that while it is a great start, I feel that there can be some improvement made on it. It seems to be missing a little bit of information and could have been w=made with more detail. There also needs to be more references listed in different parts of the article to make it seem stronger.