User:LumpyRee/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
WikiProject Civil engineering

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
As a civil engineering student, I always look out for any opportunity that helps me to know my major better and discover its fields. I never get bored of learning anything related to engineering. By choosing this article, I can benefit myself through learning new information and to work harder on the assignment.

Evaluate the article
This article is an introduction to a group and people, whom are specialized in engineering, aiming in enhancing the quality of civil engineering related articles and to make them more credible.

As a whole, I noticed that this introduction-article is very short and I think that it lacks a lot of information. For example, they said that it is created by a "group" but they did not specify the number of members who participated in writing this article. I personally find this as an important point, because the more civil engineers, the more credible the article/project is.

Their purpose is very clear and direct, which is good, but I wish they wrote them as a paragraph instead of bullet points, it just seems that they want to be "excessively" concise.

The scope section is pretty good, its easy to understand the language used, it suits both engineering-related people and other people that might be into engineering, thus attract more people to read their introduction.

It bothered me that the group allows members and non-members to participate in editing their articles and projects. Even though Wikipedia is open to everyone, but I think to increase their credibility, they must try to apply some restrictions. For example, dividing group members into smaller group, where each is responsible for a specific task in an article/project, their work would be more credible and authentic then.

The article did not include any source, the writing is mainly based on normative statements, which in my opinion does not support the purpose of the article, they need to work on this point. And the only figure included in their article is a picture of a bridge being constructed and a table showing Wikipedia's civil engineering qualities table. I don't think that these two figures necessarily needs be included in the article, and they are not actually cited within the text, which makes no sense at all.

I really don't have further opinions about the following sections, I found them very informative and defines the group structure and aim well.