User:Jelopple/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
John Jea

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I never heard of this person before and I thought it would be interesting to learn about how a formerly enslaved person came to be an itinerant preacher and sailor. Furthermore, the article page was looking a bit dull. Despite the length of John Jea's narrative, only a fraction of his life seems to be outlined within this article. Furthermore, I believe this article needs some work with it's formatting. The sections "early life" and "later life" are good for a broad over view, however, if I was a stranger trying to find information about something specific about this person's life, this would be a difficult task to accomplish without reading through the article. My understanding of a Wikipedia page is that it can be used as a quick reference to something, and with this current formatting, I am not sure that the word "quick" would be a good descriptive word for its accessibility in information.

Evaluate the article
This article has concise lead and introduces the article for how it is a bit well. I feel like the word "widely" should be replaced with "domestically and internationally" for clarity. The lead should also have a brief description of the major sections of the article. It is a good thing that it doesn't right now though because I would like to revamp the way it is organized. The article's content is relevant and up to date. The most recent source came from the year 2018. There is definitely some content missing. I wish it elaborated more on Jea's religion and travels. This article deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps. Quite a few of the secondary sources used requires one to purchase the book or have access to the content through their linkage with an institution. This article also address topic related to historically underrepresented populations and topics through it being on the topic of early narratives. The article also complies with a neutral tone and quotes any argumentative ideas to their respective authors concerning the analysis of Jea's narrative. Most of the fact are backed up by reliable secondary sources. If not secondary sources, then the primary sources was referenced. The sources used follows a spectrum of authors. However, this article does recycle through some of them. Despite this, all the sources so far are good since most of them are from peer- reviewed journals. All of the links works. In terms of organization and writing quality, this article was concisely composed and was easy to read, with no glaring grammatical or spelling errors. In my opinion, this article could have been better organized. The sections should have been broken down some more. More images should be added too. The talk page is rather bleak as well. This was expected since this is a stub-class article that is part of WikiProject Biography, WikiProject United States History, and WikiProject United States. Overall, this article needs some work. There is so much more information that can be added. There should be more information involving Jea's religion (methodism) and literary techniques within the narrative (Jea's usage of Biblical allusions). Furthermore, this article needs to be reorganized to better serve its purpose as a quick look up. This article it quite short and underdeveloped, which really does make it qualify to fall under the stub-class.