User:Kaitsass/sandbox

Article: Patricia Bizzell

Lead Section: The article's lead section looks pretty solid. It contains a good first sentence and a generally good overview of what the rest of the article contains (which is mostly just lists of Bizzell's books and other publications). However, the lead section ends with some information about Bizzell that I think would be better suited farther into the article, about her being the subject of a book chapter. This information could be used to help expand the article and combat the the note that the article needs to include more outside sources.

Content: The content of this article is mainly made up of lists of publication from Bizzell. While this is useful information, there is room to add more information about her and her publications, like the example cited above about the book chapter written about her.

Tone and Balance: Because the article consist mainly of these lists of her accomplishments, there is not much room to evaluate the tone of the article; however, the lead section does have a neutral tone.

Sources and References: The article has a banner claiming that it needs to include more citations to reliable sources. While the article lists a number of Bizzell's publication and contributions to the field and a couple of external links, there are no references included on the page.

Organization and Writing Quality: While the lead section is well written in a neutral tone, there is room for expansion in this article. That expansion would also present the opportunity to properly cite information found on the article.

Images and Media: The article does not currently have any images.

Talk Page Discussion: The Talk Page notes that this article is part of the WikiProject Biography and the WikiProject Writing. The article was also nominated for deletion back in 2006, which is also when the last edits were made. There was no consensus on the deletion of the page, but there has also been no continued effort to improve the article.

Overall Impressions: It seems that this article is a likely candidate for deletion if improvements are not made, and it also does not look like anyone has worked on the article in a long time. There is definitely room for expansion and improvement here in order to allow this page to stay on Wikipedia.