User:Purplejedi/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating
European theater of World War II

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article is about a topic I am not only interested in but will be studying while I am getting my masters degree.

Lead Section
The lead section of the European theater of World War II Wikipedia page does a good job of defining the topic and providing a concise overview. From just the first sentence one can understand what this page is going to be about. The lead section is well organized and gives just enough details to let the reader know what it entails. In fact, one can get a concise and quick synopsis of what is to come in the following sections of the page.

Content
The content of the article is of good substance. It is up to date and relevant to the topic of the page and spreads it out in a way that can be easily read, and information can be easily found. The content, though, does not seem to include information about any underrepresented group of people. The words woman, women, black, African, and even the word Jew are not anywhere in this page. This is a deficit in the possible information that could be provided for this topic. While during the time period these underrepresented groups did not play as big of a part in the war, they were still participants who made a difference no matter how small.

Tone and Balance
World War II is one of the topics that, even with its massive history, people seem to have opinions about, but it seems that the page is written from a neutral standpoint. Unless something was missed, this page is not biased and does not seem to lean towards any certain position or seem to try to make the reader think a certain way. There are no viewpoints nor information from or about minorities. It is written about the main participants of the war in the European Theater.

Sources and References
The sources that are used to back up the information in this page are good. They are well organized and seem relatively up to date. There is a section for footnotes with more information from the page. This is followed by citations, work sighted, and then further reading. There is a plethora of information backing this page and available to the reader. Though, once again it seems this page is lacking information from its minority groups.

Organization and Writing Quality
The organization of this paper is well thought out. There are clear and concise sections with related information to its topic. Due to the organization there is an ease to the flow of information making it easy to read and understand. It seems to be well revised with no obvious grammatical or spelling errors.

Images and Media
The images included in the page are good quality. They are spaced out and well captioned. There are a few within each section which makes it easy to navigate the page. It does not bog down the reader with pictures that overshadow the writing. In fact due to the relevance to the section it is in and the captions it helps the reader to understand what is going on. All the pictures used adhere to the Wikipedia copyright regulations.

Talk Page Discussion
On the talk pages Wikipedians are having conversations about the page. Some are to stop trolling and unnecessary word usage while others are about data that should be included in the page, and some about the lack of information in certain sections compared to others. This Wikipedia page is in three Wikiprojects, Europe, Military History, and European History. The Wikiproject Europe is rated c-class, high importance while the other two project pages are rated start-class.

Overall Impression
Overall this was a good Wikipedia page. It is well laid out and organized. There seems to be an even distribution of information with no one topic seeming to overpower the rest. Its media is well spread out and explained, enhancing the writing and making it easier for the reader to understand what is happening. It definitely needs help with information about and by underrepresented groups and minorities. This Wikipedia page is far from being complete and needs and should be updated over time. Even with its few flaws it is a good article.