User:Maiab3/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Federal Way Public Schools (FWPS)

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 this article as I went through the Federal Way Public School system myself, and have seen the change in the district itself over a span of twelve years. This subject in particular matters to me as over 21,136 students are in the system, and secondary education can be often overlooked. That being said, my preliminary impression of the article was that the article has multiple issues-- this was due to the big warning at the top of the page that said "this article has multiple issues." After that initial impression, I was fairly impressed with the amount of information on the page, but noticed that it was outdated.

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 included an introductory sentence that concisely describes the article's topic - it included where FWPS was located and the amount of schools in its jurisdiction.
 * The lead does not include a brief description of the article's major sections, as two of the main sections are censorship and governance, leading to this section slightly missing the mark.
 * The lead does include information that is not included in the article, as it mentions an online school, but does not go further into detail as it does to the other schools.
 * The lead as a whole is concise.

Content

 * The article's content is mostly relevant to the topic, however, there is one section about censorship. This feels out of line with the rest of the content being presented.
 * The content is mostly up-to-date, as only one of the school board members has changed since the page was last edited (27 September 2023 at 19:34).
 * As I previously mentioned, the censorship section feels like it doesn't belong, but further research is needed to make a final decision. Other than that, it doesn't appear that major content is missing.
 * This article could deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (as it is one of the most diverse school districts in the area), but it does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Tone and Balance

 * The article is not neutral, as it contains several pieces of content that are written like an advertisement. Things like trends in increasing graduation rates, above and beyond community service, with the ending statement being who the superintendent is.
 * It appears that some of these claims are more towards a positive bias in lieu of what the school district is accomplishing.
 * Being that the article is largely facts, there are no viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented.
 * Again, this article is more about facts, so no mention of minority or fringe viewpoints.
 * The article does try to persuade the reader to think of FWPS in a positive light, as they highlight the vast accomplishments that they've been able to achieve.

Sources and References

 * All the facts are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information, however, the majority of data comes from FWPS itself.
 * The sources are thorough, but after my own investigation, there could be more of a variety of sources.
 * While the sources are more recent, they should still be replaced with more current sources (as the majority of the references span from 2019 - 2021).
 * There is no 'one author' to the majority of the sources, as they are written by an organization. Due to this, I am unable to answer the question to whether or not historically marginalized individuals are even included.
 * As mentioned previously, there are better sources available by reliable organizations than FWPS itself (for these links, please view the potential articles source list).
 * The majority of the links work, but there are a couple sources which show the "404 -- Page Not Found."

Organization and Writing Quality

 * All in all the article is concise, clear and easy to read.
 * There are no grammatical or spelling errors.
 * The article is well-organized and easy to follow.

Images and Media

 * There are no images included on this article.
 * N/A to: If the images are well-captioned, adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations, and if the image is laid out in a visual appealing way.

Talk Page Discussion

 * There were no conversations displayed on how to represent this topic.
 * The article is rated as "list-class." It is of interest to "United States: Washington/Seattle" and "Schools" WikiProjects.
 * We have not discussed this topic in class, but seems to be less informative than other local district pages.

Overall Impressions

 * The article's overall status is a "list-class."
 * The article's strengths lie in how succinct and informative it is, as the page itself is easy to digest.
 * I can article can be improved by adding a wider variety of sources, having different contributors to the page, and updating the information already on the page. I also feel the refinement (or even removal) of the censorship sub-section would be helpful to assist in the continuity of the page.
 * I would assess the article to be underdeveloped, but having a good start.