User:Nmcs00/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Vanadium

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
One of the few elements on wikipedia with a B rating. Was intrigued to see what was lacking in the page.

Evaluate the article

 * Lead Section
 * Good overview of the element
 * It felt that a bit too much space was taken up with history
 * From a chemical perspective there could have been more said about Vanadium's chemical activity and how it compares to other elements (such as what is said in the Coumpounds section)
 * Content
 * The breakdown of content felt complete. More coudl always be added, but the article was able to hit key themes and link to more detaioled pages
 * Tone and Balance
 * Tone is neutral throughout article
 * Sources and References
 * Thoroughly cited
 * Upon initial inspection most sources look to be primary (can see doi links or journal names), or databases
 * Organization and Writing quality
 * Organisation seem reasonable
 * The only section I was unsatisfied with was the "Characteristics" section. It felt vague and incomplete. Pages like iron have a lot more features listed under this section that this page could benifit from.
 * Images and Media
 * Diverse use of crystal structure diagrams, molecule illustratiosn and pictures of metal and items containing vanadium (mushrooms).
 * The figures aded to the written content rather than just ornate it which was good to see
 * Talk page discussion
 * Full and frequent
 * I think the greatest difficulty with a topic as the talk broad as an element is finding how much information to add and how muh to reserve/delve into more in linked page
 * Impressions
 * The artcile seems near completion
 * I would model this page out of more complete ones like that for iron for guidance on how to complete some sections like "Characteristics"
 * What is currently there is quite good, but I think mroe details could be added