User:Lvega2/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Puerto Rican Communist Party

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it is a stub both in the Puerto Rican and communist party related fields. Additionally, there is a banner at the top that suggests the article needs further citations to verify the material written. As a first impression, it appears that is is generally lacking in solid source information and lacking in abundant details regarding the party's role in socialist thought within Puerto Rico. I think this article is certainly important to understand the development of Puerto Rican socialism and deserves further elaboration.

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.)

Lead Section

The lead section is quite blunt with what the article is about, only being composed of a single sentence. There is no general summary of the article to be found in this lead. There is no summary of the major sections and does not provide any substantial detail as to what the article is about. It is as bare bones as a lead could possibly be.

Content

The article's content does appear to be relevant to the topic, detailing some of the history of the PCP including some of its major founders/leaders and a bit about why it was created. The content does not appear to be up to date however, as this article has not been edited since the late 2000's. Since this article is a stub, it appears to be missing any major details regarding the party's accomplishments, failures, major movements, anything of the sort. It is a bare bones history lacking in detail. It does not mention why the Socialist Party was favored over the Communist Party, any potential rivals, etc. This article appears to be a good place to expand on Puerto Rican representation and equity simply because of the nature of the topic.

Tone and Balance

This article reads neutral. There appear to be no inflammatory remarks regarding the party or whether or not the party was good or bad, simply that it did not gain a large following. Since this article is so bare bones however, there is no mention or discussion on viewpoints within the party, or critiques of the party, etc. There is no mission statements regarding what the party stood for or any of its opponent's reservations with the party. There is no persuasive element in this article, but there is hardly enough information to even make a determination on whether or not there is a persuasive element.

Sources and References

Unfortunately, the sources on this article are dead links. Only one source, the second one specifically, have a working link. This source is incredibly long and convoluted, so I am not sure what the relevance of this source is to the actual information being presented in the article. Bottom line is that these sources are out of date and since the other two sources are dead links, it only relies on one source to make its historical claims. I am sure that there are plenty of secondary sources that could expand on this article, however, by guess is that they will largely have to be primary sources since this topic seems so little researched. Many of the links attached to the names of the party's founders lead to non-existent Wiki pages as well.

Organization and Writing Quality

The article is well written for the most part, despite the lack of details. It is broken down only into the history topic, but that's about it in terms of organizational qualities.

Images and Media

The article only includes one image. The image of the hammer and sickle here, while captioned, does not provide any detail as to who drew this image or for what it was used for.

Talk Page

There is only one comment made about this article from 2007 suggesting to look into the Socialist Front article for more information. Not sure what that is referring to. In any case, the article is rated as a stub and a part of the WikiSocialism Project. It has also been rated as having Low-Importance on the project's importance scale.

Overall Impressions

It appears that this article is pretty dead, nobody has talked about it since 2007! It is a stub and needs to be expanded on. It is poorly developed and incomplete, it requires some major structuring and attention with detail in pretty much every aspect. Hopefully I can give this article the love it deserves!