User:MonaeSears/Evaluate an Article

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.)

I chose this article because I have an interest in doing post graduate research for my career as a physics major. My main first impression was that I was surprised as to how short the article was.

Evaluate the article
The lead sentences clearly describe the topic of the article and is a good and understanding way of opening the subject. The introduction doesn't go into explicit detail about the subtopics mentioned in the article, but a contents section is provided of the subtopics. The lead doesn't introduce information in great detail, it simply describes the qualifications someone would have, for it to be considered post-graduate research. As I read through it, I realized the article itself did not really need to be as long as I expected it to be. It explains the topic in a concise and simple way that is easy to digest as a reader.

The articles content is very relevant to the topic and up-to-date, there aren't any subtopics mentioned that are conflicting with current evidence of what postgraduate research is. The article doesn't focus on underrepresented peoples, but rather the general structure of post-graduate research and its representation. The article is very neutral and does not lean to any certain opinion or point. An example of how post graduate research is perceived and gone about in India if given, but the article does not say that it is better or worse than the United States' or any other country.

The article is backed up by some sources from the 3 out of the 5 citation links that worked. One was a dead link and the other didn't lead to a proper website. Another link was to a page on the WayBackMachine for an article from around 2010. One was from a webpage from the University of Pennsylvania's website and the other from UK Research and Innovation. Some other relevant sources would be post graduate opportunity links from colleges around the United States and other parts of the world to see how these programs differ or are similar. The article is well-written and easy to read and would most likely be easy for the average Wikipedia user to go over. The formatting of the article is also neat and easy to look at.

There are no images in the article but the images are not really necessary for this particular subject. The questions asked on the talk page are relevant and topical, asking about post graduate research in other countries as well as the qualms of it.The article is also part of the WikiProject Education to add more education related topics to Wikipedia. The articles overall status is good, it's strength is that it is short and to the point, any longer and it would have probably seemed like a stretch for one topic (aside from the differences other parts of the world might have). The article could be improved with working links and references to more up to date. The article is well developed and doesn't seem to have holes of incomplete information.