User:NR UST DATA/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Thomas Bayes

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 am evaluating the article for its relevance to the study of statistics and data communication. It is an important article as it details a quite famous statistician. My preliminary impression of the article was that it was concise as it should be, linking to work related to Bayes as opposed to including this in the article about him.

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.)

The lead section provides a concise description of the topic of the article however it does not include any mention of Bayesianism which is one of only three further topics talked about in the article. This would be useful to include and would only take a single sentence.

The content of the article is relevant and appears to be up to date.

The tone of the article is neutral and the article is balanced. It examines the life and work of Bayes without unnecessary opinion. It simply recounts those notable things about his life and legacy.

The images and media included in the article support it and do not distract from its content. It is unlikely that more media is needed as it is unlikely to exist given the era of the subject. Images are placed to the side, which is organized and neat. Though this is true it would be useful to place them inline with the content that they line up with. Also as is discussed in the talk page it is unclear if the portrait is one of Bayes at all.

The page is part of the statistics wiki project and is rated C seemingly due to uncertainty over content and broken links.

In order to improve the article, the portrait of Bayes should be removed as there is at least one source which says it is definitely not a portrait of the subject. Contrary to some of the points in the talk page though it would be best not to include writing on some additional topics like game theory. It could be useful to place a link in the related section at the bottom but no more writing is neccesary to give the concise overview of Bayes this article seeks to provide.