User:Maxmattaaa/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Federal Bureau of Investigation

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 because I have always had an interest in the FBI and would like to learn more about it, and why it is so important.

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 in the Federal Bureau of Investigation has a pretty well developed introductory sentence, and it talks a lot about the FBI and gives a well written description about it. The lead does include a brief description of the article's major sections throughout the entire article. The lead does not include many irrelevant facts and has a lot of important things. The lead is in the middle of both being long and short, I feel that it is a good length and has a lot of important information.

Content page

The content in this article is very relevant and I feel the topics that have been talked about on it are very relevant. The article looks like it has a lot of up to date topics and it looks like it has been updated very recently. There is definitely some topics that can be added to it, everything in here is explained pretty well so far and nothing needs taken out. Throughout the article there are equity gaps there are some stuff in there but it is room for things to be put in there such as types of groups inside the FBI.

Tone and Balance

I would say that the article is neutral and it doesn't really have a side, it's all just talking about the FBI and what it is. From what I read so far there are not any claims that are completely bias towards them or a certain position. There are not many things that are over said or understated throughout the article. There are not very many minority or fringe view points in the article. The article doesn't try to persuade one another in it, there are many different view points and its not bias.

Sources and References

From everything and all the links I had clicked to check and see if they are reliable, they had been backed up by secondary sources. Most of the sources in the article are thorough and they show the available literature on the topic shown. There are mostly current sources but there are some that are from awhile ago and not up to date. The sources are written by a lot of different authors and people. They do involve historically marginalized people. There is definitely some help that can be done for some of the sources in this article. I checked the links and most of them work and take you to a resourceful website.

Organization and writing quality

This article is written well with lots of length and good sources. The article does not have any gramical errors that I have noticed or read. It is pretty well organized and broken down into sections that make sense.

Images and Media

The article has many pictures to go with the topics, although some could give a better picture that describes the topic. Some of the images on the page are not captioned of what they are, and some are. I am not sure if all of the images are copyright regulation. I feel the images could be placed better because they are not very appealing.

Talk Page discussion

There were not many conversations in the talk page but the few that were just talking and agreeing on topics. The article is a B class article and it is highly rated. There isn't a different way it's been the same.

Overall impressions

The articles overall status is good and has been recently updated. The articles strengths are how much there is on different topics. The article is definitely missing a few things like more topics about inside the FBI. I feel that the article is 75% complete, it's written well but things can always be improved.