User:Princekahree washington/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 it because Im interested in nanotechnology and its many uses and affects on society, It matters because depending on how far along it becomes nanotechnology could seriously impact how we go about healthcare, It had a warning that it could contain unverified and speculative material while it seemed very professional I noticed a couple of citing mistakes.

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 wasn't in bold and the summary was very short. There is no descriptions of the articles major sections. The lead was concise. The content is focused on the topic, the article was edited a couple of moths ago so the content is up to date. Nothing seems to be missing or unnecessarily added to the article.

The article does talk about social justice such as developing countries. The article seems neutral and always list both the pros and the cons. Middle to upper class seem to be more represented because they would have more access to this technology. Not all the facts are backed up by a source.The majority of sources are outdated and the links don't work or lead to websites where the pages are removed.

The organization of the article is okay for me but I think there should be more bold starting paragraphs and more sections to focus the information. There aren't any images. The talk page seems to have moved and when I visited the other one no one seemed to be talking about the article I was on the article was rated c-class. \

Over all the article is developing, Its strengths are its huge worth of knowledge and facts, It just needs more citing and fact checking, this article is somewhat developed.