User:Lea baba UdeM/Evaluate an Article

Lead section :

In this article, the lead section describes the article's topics and it gives the reader a quick overview on the topic which is great. Although the lead gives a good introduction about the topic, it is pretty much the whole article. The article is very briefly / vaguely developed if not. Perhaps the lead has a bit of additional information that could be developed and formed into a good structured article.

Content :

Again, content wise, the information are very little to be evaluated yet some big titles of protentional content are proposed. I would say that the content is in fact up to date and relevant to the topic.

Tone and Balance:

The article shows two different points of vu without being biased to taking any sides : it has a neutral tone. In fact all the viewpoints are presented in the same neural way and in are rather the same length which does not let the reader get persuaded in any way.

Sources and references:

Even thought some articles might seem a bit out of date (2002-2003) one of them is actually very up to date (2022). Besides, each paragraph is accompanied by a source that is considered rather reliable since they are coming from an educational administration of various different authors. I did a bit of digging for the better sources questions, in fact, it is very hard to find a neural article or source of information for this topic since most people like to present their own perspective and points of vu that are related to this subject.

Organization and reading quality:

The article is simple, clear and rather well written without any spelling mistakes for as far as I can tell. It is structured and divided into three paragraphs going from macro to micro in terms of information and details.

Image and media:

There aren't any media or images in this article.

Talk page discussion:

Overall the "talk page" is many a representation of a bunch of people who are either evaluating or correcting some mistakes that they saw. This article actually takes part in many wikiprojects.

Overall impressions:

This article has a big margin of improvements. The definition and overall development is a bit vague which could be solved by adding more sources. this article is in fact in desperate need of development since it limits the the subject and its various content. It can be improved by adding more pictures and updating some of the sources.

Which article are you evaluating?
Politics in education - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article this since it was always a bit part of my life. I used to live the middle east, in Lebanon specifically, where education is sometimes influenced by the country's politics despite the fact that it is forbidden. In addition, it has always been part of our lives, for example back in the days in the 1930s young kids where obliged -in some countries- by their dictators to attend "special" schools in order to spread propaganda. At first glance, I noticed that the article is very short and doesn't provide loads of detailed information about the topic.

Evaluate the article
To begin with, the article's lead is not bad although the definition could be a bit more detailed. The article as a whole should be more detailed. The context is rather more made of "titles" that are not developed at all. The tone is neutral and is not biased in any way. Some of the sources should be a bit more updated and there should be more sources. The text is clear and simple, anyone could understand and there are no typo or grammar mistakes. It could also be improved by adding some media and images.