User:LukeTelder5/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating Brandon Scott - Brandon Scott

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 mayor Brandon Scott because he is a mayor of a major city (Baltimore) and does not have a detailed Wikipedia page.

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 article's lead is concise and tells what the topic of the article will be.

The lead does include a table of contents that shows the major sections of the article. The lead only includes information that is present in the article. The lead is straight forward and includes all the things that are mentioned in the table of contents

The lead is concise and does not go on for too long or bore the reader.

The content is only relevant to the topic that is presented. The article does not stray off topic and talk about other things.

The articles content is relevant to the topic. It is all about his election that he won as well as his time as mayor. It also briefly talks about his early life.

the content is up to date. There is info about his policies that include how he handled the pandemic

I don't think I'd say that there is certain content that is missing, but I feel like there could be more detail in the topics that are already there.

The article does deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.

The article is strictly informational, so it is neutral

There are no claims that are heavily biased towards one position.

There are no view points that are over or underrepresented. This is informational

The article does not persuade the reader one way or the other.

The article is well written and easy to read

The article has no grammatical or spelling errors.

The article is well organized and has sections that make it easy to follow.

The article includes multiple images that help me know who Brandon Scott is.

I do think the images could be captioned better. They are pretty short

The images do adhere to the copyright rules.

The images are laid out in a somewhat appealing way.

There were very few conversations happening in the talk page. There were some talks about the images that were there and about his elections

This article is in the scope of a WikiProject Biography.

The article is more direct and to the point. It only gives the facts.

I am not sure what the article's status is.

The article's main strength is that it is unbiased and gives the information that we need.

The article can be improved by being more detailed.

The article is definitely well developed but it could just use some more work, especially with the detail