User:Lilyrvo/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Marietta Minnigerode Andrews

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am interested in American feminism and the women in history who were committed to furthering the cause of female rights, and the description of the article depicts Marietta Andrews as a contributor to the feminist movement in the United States. After viewing the article, it is clear that it is missing a lot of key information about the topic and that it may be under-sourced.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:

The lead section of this article is comprised of one sentence. It very briefly provides a general understanding of who the topic of the article is, but there is no further information on the structure of the article or other important information about Marietta Minnigerode Andrews. The lead describes Andrews as a "painter and designer", and her career is generally discussed later in the article, but her work could be emphasized to a greater extent to make the lead more compatible with the information explained in the article.

Content:

The article's information on the topic is related to life and career of the topic. It is up to date and describes relevant events in Andrews' life. The information provided could be broadened and more detailed, as there seems to be a lack of material about the topic. The content discusses a few major details about Andrews, but large periods of her life are excluded from the article which makes the article, on a whole, feel underdeveloped. There is no mention of equity gaps, Andrews' position in society as a woman, or her contribution to the feminist movement in the article.

Tone and Balance:

The article seems to be from a neutral point of view. The main information in the article is factual and provides a brief description of the events that occurred within Marietta Minnigerode Andrews' life. There is no attempt to persuade a reader on any point.

Sources and References:

The sources are diverse, there is a mix of authors and media between the different sources. There are not a lot of sources for the article, but the article is very short so the number of sources seems proportional to the information provided. The sources are relatively current, the online sources were all accessed within the past five years and the written sources are products of well-known and reliable publishers. One of the online source links works, but doesn't lead to the intended article, so the information that is sourced from there is hard to track. The article also uses Wikilinks to its advantage, siting known places and groups to peer-reviewed articles.

Organization and Writing:

The information that is provided is clear and concise, however, a few sentences could be rewritten to make the article flow better. The main problem with this article is a lack of sections, so I think breaking down the information provided into separate sections, instead of having it all under one section, would make it easier to read and understand. Breaking down the article into sections might also provide opportunities to add more information on the topic to fill out each of those sections and present the topic more completely.

Images and Media:

There is only one image in the article. The image is clear and adds to the lead section's description of Andrews, but there are no pictures of the Andrews herself. More images could be added to enhance the article.

Talk Page and Discussions:

There are not any conversations occurring on the Talk Page

Overall Impressions:

I think that the article provides general facts about Marietta Minnigerode Andrews but could benefit from more research and information on the topic as a whole. Adding different sections and media may help organize the article into a more readable format and aid to the addition of information.