User:Jsanderson31/Evaluate an Article

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it is something that interests me and something that I am passionate about advocating against. This subject matters because I think treatment of "illegal" citizens at the border is often overlooked and there is so little attention, that there are inhumane things happening without justice. My first impression was that this article seems to be thorough subject-wise, but information could be adjusted or sourced differently, and also, different POVs could be useful as this article has a high number of views by people on wikipedia.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: I think this could have a bit more background, however, it is fairly concise as of now. There is a random statement concerning a director, which I think should have its own section down the article a bit. I does not go over the specific sections it plans to discuss in the lead section.

Content: The majority of this section is relevant to the topic, however a few sources do seem irrelevant. The sources, for the most part, do seem very recent and relevant. The "criticisms" section is much larger than other sections, however within this topic I find this appropriate. I think the sexual abuse and gendered violence need to be much more prevalent here. In my opinion, it does address underrepresented topics.

Tone and Balance: I do find this article well-balanced and I think it is very neutral in its language and sourcing. I feel as though the voices of the minority groups discussed are not represented enough throughout the article.

Sources & References: The sources are very current, however, a few links do not lead anywhere and some sources seem illegitimate/unreliable. Not enough marginalized voices are represented in the evidence/sourcing. I do think there are better studies, peer-reviewed articles, and first-hand experiences to reference within the article.

Organization and writing quality: The structure could be improved, as well as the vocabulary and grammar. It is easy to read, however some sections are dragged out with run-on sentences that could be fixed and improved.

Images and Media: I find the images and their captions represent parts of the article that are less relevant/important concerning the topic at hand. I think better media can be added to better represent the serious human rights issues being addressed with this article. The photos are small, and the layout is not necessarily pleasing.

This article has been the target of 4 wiki projects that I can see on the talk page and have been edited by students. I find that the way we address these subjects in class are much more graphic and are discussed without the kind of filters and guidelines that Wikipedia requires. I think that it can be difficult to discuss these horrific events within that censorship for the internet, especially concerning images and media.

As of now, this article sits at an S status that can be improved. I think the article has certain sections that are both underdeveloped or overdeveloped. As for positives, this article has a lot of potential to be easily digestible for people just starting to get exposed to these topics. This article is informative and has decent sources.