User:MaddiShepard77/Evaluate an Article

Lead section: The article has a good introductory sentence describing who the article is about. The introduction is very brief and includes a table of the major sections, with nothing that is not included in the article.

Content: The content of the article seems relevant and up to date. However, the section talking about Andy Schor's career is much larger than the section that talks about his early life. There should be more information in that section.

Tone and balance: The article is written from a neutral point of view. There are no value statements. Everything seems to be objective.

Sources and references: The sources seem reliable and up to date. There is a variety. However, most of them are published in Lansing, but this might be unavoidable since this is about someone who was a Lansing politician.

Organization and Writing quality: The organization is okay. the article doesn't flow very well and is set more more like bullet points rather than flowing sentences/paragraphs. However, the way the sections are set up make sense. It is easy to read and thee do not appear to be any spelling or grammar errors.

Images and Media: There is one photo of Andy in the article. It is a clear and visible photo that shows exactly what he looks like. There could potentially be more photos but I don't think it's 100% necessary based on what the article is about.

Talk page: I could only see one comment from someone on the talk page. They were just saying that they made an edit and would like other people to review it.

Overall I think this article just needs more information. I think the current sections should stay. more information needs to be added about his earlylife. I also think there should be a section on his accomplishments in office/what he did during his time in office, etc. I also think it should flow together better and be more cohesive. It looks more like an outline right now.

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

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.)

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.)