User:Mswan13/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Hannah Woolley

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because of Hannah Woolley's relevance to FCS. She was a pioneer in household management, especially when it came to writing books on household management.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of the article is concise and accurately provides a description of the article's content. It is precise and pertains only relevant information to the rest of the article.

The content of the article appears to be up-to-date. It also addresses a historically underrepresented group, especially when considering the time in history that Hannah Woolley lived. Unfortunately, the article does not provide a large quantity of information related to Hannah Woolley and important details, such as the date of her death, are missing.

The article is written from a neutral and balanced tone. Only factual information is given.

The sources used for the article are thorough. A few of the sources used are fairly older but that is likely because of how long ago Hannah Woolley lived and due to the fact that there appears to be few current sources related to her. The links to each source work properly. The facts presented in the article are backed up by proper references.

The article is well-organized and well-written. It was very concise and clear to read. I did not detect any grammatical errors.

The article provides one image. It abides by Wikipedia's copyright regulations and is laid out in the article in an appealing manner. It is appropriately captioned with background information on the image's origins.

There is no talk page discussion occurring for the article. The article is rated C-class across every category and WikiProjects that it is a part of. I found it after searching through WikiProjects related to women's history and women writers.

My overall impressions of the article are that it is well-written and it has strengths in providing well-backed and accurate information. The article's completeness seems slightly underdeveloped. However, this may be due to the lack of secondary sources of information on this topic. I believe the article could be improved by adding important details about Hannah Woolley such as her year of death or her career as a physician.