User:Ktrachsel01/Evaluate an Article

Hamline University - Wikipedia
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Because it talks about the sports at Hamline and Hamline's history which I think is interesting because this is where I go to school!
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Lead Section
The Lead gives a decent overview of what the article will be about and gives some basic facts about the history of Hamline but does not give an explanation of all of the topics being discussed later in the article. It does repeat a few things in the article that is said in the introduction. This lead is very concise and gives an overall view of what Hamline is. ￼

CONTENT

The content is all relevant to what Hamline is about and is an overall review of what has happened at Hamline. The content goes back and forth in time between a longgg time ago and to more recent times and does that in the introduction as well. It goes over the main things a freshman would be looking for at college and then also talks about some controversies that have happened at Hamline and goes over topics that aren't super widely known.

TONE AND BALANCE

In the controversy sections it talks about issues and stays neutral and explains each side and is more of a history lesson, not opinions. The only area it is trying to convince people of something is when it talks about the school and says only good things about it.

Sources and References

There is a long-detailed list of sources and references on this page and many links that lead you to different pages or articles which shows this article is credible. The sources are thorough and reflect what is being said.

ORGANIZATION

It's very clean and easy to read with lots of big, bolded headers for each section. There were no grammatical errors that I saw on the article, and it is broken down into the right number of parts. One thing they could do it put it in order in the area of timeline.

IMAGES AND MEDIA

The article doesn't have an overload of images and mostly just uses them when necessary, and each of the graphs and pictures are labeled correctly with a caption underneath them. The images and graphs are visually appealing and very useful.

TALK PAGE DISCUSSION

The talk page is mostly going over the recent controversies at Hamline and people giving insight on it.

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS

Overall, this is a very good article, the facts are correct, it is organized well and has lots of real sources to back it up. This article could work on the layout of timeline because it jumps back in forth in time when scrolling through the article but other than that it is good and feels complete.

(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.)