User:Kmcmiche/Evaluate an Article

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

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 chose this article because I did not know anything about it. It matters because it is supposed to explain what utopianism is, but I do not believe that the article expanded my knowledge on the topic very wel.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The lead section was well written with an adequate amount of information. It does include information that is not well expanded on in the rest of the article. The content is vaguely relevant to the topic, but it is not up to date. There is a significant amount of information missing. The article is neutral and does not attempt to persuade the reader. The sources are current and reliable, but they are not thorough. The links work well, and there are better sources available. The article is organized well, with no apparent grammatical or spelling errors. The article is easy to read. There are no images available on the article page. The article is part of a series on Utopias, but it is not a part of any WikiProjects. Most of the talk page is discussion the lack of information in the article. Overall, the article needs significant improvement by the addition of more information. It is severely underdeveloped.