User:KRSciller/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The article in which I am evaluating is about the life of Mary Katharine Goddard. The link to this article is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Katharine_Goddard.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this specific article about Mary Katharine Goddard because she was my topic for our second jigsaw project. The article was not too long and has room for improvement. My preliminary impression of the article was that it was short and to the point. The article gave the big facts about its subject. I noticed the article did not go into much detail into any of its sections which is what I think could be improved on.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this article clearly described the topic of the article. It was short enough but also included enough information to accurately describe the topic. The lead includes a brief introduction to the main section of the article. The section of the article that the lead introduces is the main and most important section of the article. It is not overly detailed and is very concise. It is a good introduction to the rest of the article and gives readers a good overview of the article's subject without having to read the entire article.

As far as the content of the article, everything is up-to-date and is relevant to the topic. All of the content that is included belongs and makes sense considering the topic of the article. There is no major content missing from the article however I do believe that there could be more detail into particular sections. The only major piece of information that I perceived was missing was the fact that the subject of the article, Mary Katharing Goddard, is known as one of the first female postmasters in the United States. This is one of the main reasons as to Mary Katharine Goddard’s fame. I believe that this should be included in the article as it is a major aspect of Mary Katharine Goddard’s legacy. This however, is the only major content missing. This article does also address a historically underrepresented population. Women in graphic design history have often been overlooked and not been given credit for their accomplishments. This is also a major reason as to why I believe it is important to add the aforementioned missing content.

When it comes to tone and balance, the article is neutral as there are no sides to take in a biographical article such as this. There are no claims that are biased or viewpoints that are underrepresented or overrepresented. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

When it comes to the sources and references of the article, some were better than others. To begin, all of the sources were relevant to the topic and information provided in the text. Some of the sources were more reliable as they came from libraries and such while others are from independent sources. There were multiple links that did not work altogether. Additionally, one of the sources, The Washington Post, you needed to sign in to access. As far as the question of whether better sources are available, I was able to find a few peer reviewed sources touching on this subject but not many. When doing my own research on this topic, I had trouble finding more academic sources on Mary Katharine Goddard. Additionally, I found that information on her life besides her major achievements was very limited. Overall, I do believe that the listed sources in the reference list were reliable, however there are a few links that need to be updated as they no longer work.

As far as writing quality, this article does very well. It is concise, clear, and easy to read. As far as I can tell, there are no obvious grammatical or spelling errors present. On top of this, the article is well organized. It is broken down into sections that represent the major points of the subject.

In regards to images and media in the article, there is only one image included. The image is of Mary Katharine Goddard’s printed version of the Declaration of Independence with her name imprinted on the bottom of the document. This image is very relevant to the article’s content. The image is captioned correctly and does give citations for where the image is from. I do believe that the article could have included more images, particularly an image of the person the article is about.

There are not many conversations happening on the article’s talk page besides a few suggestions for the article from years ago. One of them, which I did not consider, was the spelling of Katharine. There is debate whether or not her middle name is spelt with an “a”, which is present in the article, or an “e” which can be seen in different sources. Other than that, the rest of the content on the talk page suggests clarity issues with the article. This article is of interest to three different WikiProjects including Biography, Women’s History, and Women in Business.

Overall, I believe that the article is satisfactory and delivers the biggest and most relevant information in regards to its subject. However I do believe that the article could be improved in regards to the information missing. As mentioned previously, there are pieces of information that could be included that would greatly add to the article. Additionally, I believe that the article could be a bit more detailed into the given information. Adding these things would greatly contribute to the article. Other than that, the article is well-developed and easy to read. It is a good article if readers are just looking for a quick basic overview into the life of Mary Katharine Goddard.