User:Jwaldman8/Evaluate an Article

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

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.)

I was looking through the list of article options and saw this one in the business section which interested me.My preliminary impression of the article is it is bad and needs a lot of work.

Evaluate the article

 * 1) LEAD SECTION:
 * 2) The lead does include an introductory sentence that clearly and concisely describes the topic.
 * 3) The lead does not include a brief description of all the sections talked about and the article's major sections.
 * 4) No
 * 5) The lead is very concise. Could even add some more information in it.   CONTENT:
 * 6) The article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * 7) The content is not really up to date and should be updated. There is a sentence that was probably recently added saying but besides one sentence, there is no mention of information past 2007.
 * 8) There is information missing because the article is not up to date so there is information on the topic within the gap of time where the article doesn't talk about.  TONE AND BALANCE:
 * 9) The article is written neutrally and is not opinion-based.
 * 10) There are no claims that seem to be particularly or overly biased.
 * 11) There are no viewpoints over or underrepresented. This is a page about a specific person so most if not all of the article is stating facts.
 * 12) There is no attempt of persuasion in the article as it is simply stating facts about a person life.   SOURCES AND REFERENCES:
 * 13) It seems that every fact or statement made in the article is cited and backed up by a source. However some links do not work and some sources are way more reliable than others.
 * 14) Some of the sources are thorough and reflect the topic but others are not.
 * 15) The sources are not current because there is very little up to date information.
 * 16) Yes sources are diverseT and use history to back up facts and information that was stated in the article.
 * 17) Considering the fact that some links do not work and some of the articles are not very reliable, there are definitely other sources out there with the same information that can be taken from a more reliable source.
 * 18) Not all the links work.   ORGANIZATION AND WRITING QUALITY
 * 19) The article is well written and concise.
 * 20) Little to no grammar and spelling mistakes. A few punctual errors but not many.
 * 21) Yes the article is broken down well into sections.   IMAGES AND MEDIA:
 * 22) There are no images.  TALK PAGE DISCUSSION:
 * 23) There are no conversations going on in this talk page. Someone made a very small edit to the article and no one responded or acknowledged the edit and there are no other comments.
 * 24) The article is rated start class and low importance. It is part of WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Hawaii.
 * 25) The article does not have much of a description in the talk page and does not talk about the article much.  OVERALL IMPRESSIONS:
 * 26) I think the articles status is it needs to add more information and more relevant information. It has a good starting point but could be drastically improved.
 * 27) The article does a good job of talking about Momi Cazimero's life but could go more in detail about it. As someone who established the first woman-owned graphic design firm in hawaii, I think there could be more talk about the process in creating that in the article and even more information about her life.
 * 28) I think the article is underdeveloped but definitely has potential.