User:Kaseyfountain/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Norwegian Forest cat

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am very much a cat person and am very interested in animal breeds/ Veterinary medicine. I have always loved this breed and thought I would take a look into it. I also have a lot of Norwegian in my heritage (my grandma was an immigrant from Norway!). First looking at the article, it seems to have a decent amount of information, especially the history of the breed.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The first sentence of the article clearly states that the topic is the Norwegian Forest cat. The article does briefly explain the history of the breed, the personality, and health issues found, which are the next sections. I think the lead is pretty concise but is heavily focused on the history and also mentions a gene that was linked to health problems, which I think could have been mentioned later in the article.

Content: The content is definitely relevant to the topic, and the content is up to date. The last edit was made mid September of 2021, and has had many edits previously. The content is very fitting and I think adding more would make the article feel a little too long. I do not think this article deals with one of Wikipedias equity gaps. This article focuses on the cat breed and it touches on the history of Norway but I do not believe that any of the information has been historically underrepresented.

Tone and Balance: The article is very neutral, it would be hard to make this article biased in any way since it is about a breed of cat. There is no opinions in this article, it is clearly fact-based that is supported by other articles.

Sources and References: Overall, the article does have many sources cited, but there are a few facts that still need citations. Most of the sources are in a different language so it is hard to see exactly what the sources are and where they came from. From what I can get out of them, there is a wide array of sources used, from veterinary medicine sources, to encyclopedias, to press articles. Many of the sources are older, dating back to the early 2000's and late 1990's, but there are a few that were published within the past few years. The links do work but some take a while to load. While a few of the sources are from news articles, most of them are from peer-reviewed articles or encyclopedias.

Organization and writing quality: The article is clear, concise, and easy to read. The only error I found was the spelling of "organization", the article spelled it as "organisation". The sections are well organized, but the "personality" section seems short and choppy. Overall, the sections cover the main parts of the topic.

Images and Media: All of the images are of the cat breed, which fits with the topic. The titles of the images fit the image, although there is no citations for the pictures. When clicking on the pictures, it brings up the person who posted it but no citation. The images are laid out in a visually appealing way.

Talk Page Discussion: The discussions are mainly just small questions, relating to the origin of the cat breed or other questions about the breed itself. There were also some changes to the pictures, as someone thought one of the pictures was labeled wrong. This article is in the scope of the Wikiproject Cats and Wikiproject Norway. It is rated GA-class. The only difference from the way we talked in class was that some people were making rude comments about the page, like that it was not nearly as good as other cat pages. From the talks in class, this is not how you should go about changing something.

Overall impressions: This article has good organization and keeps the subtopics concise without too many words. Although, some of the wording could be changed, but I think people who speak different languages (especially Norwegian) have contributed so that may be a reason for this shortcoming. The article also needs more citations. Overall, I think this article is well-developed, it just needs a few changes to make it better.

~