User:Quarantineditor/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Murphy High School (Alabama)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article to evaluate because i went to this High School.

Evaluate the article
This lead section does include a good introductory sentence, it is short and it gets straights to the point. One thing I noticed is that it does not list out exactly what the article is about, but it has a key/legend to tell you the major topics. Everything that is the lead section is in the article itself, nothing is listed that is listed in the article. The content and information is relevant to the topic, it focuses on one main goal. The information in the article is a little outdated. It can be updated to show the most recent rewards Murphy has gotten. As far as the rest of the other content the red link can be taken off, they could have included some information on the sports they have at Murphy. The author did a little surface research to get this information he wrote about. The tone of this article is very neutral, from what I read it did not see biased to one specific topic. All the sources on this essay does not lead to a link. The one about "Jason English" is invalid and it should be removed. Organization is the article was very excellent. Each section in the article were headed very clearly and each subsection was about the heading. There is only on picture in this whole article. It is a picture of the front of the school, basically just showing you how the schools apparently.
 * Nothing is listed that isn't listed?
 * Well, what rewards? And are they worth noting--meaning, are there secondary sources that verity it's true, and that it's important?
 * Me neither.
 * And I did. The general rule is that only people with Wikipedia articles are listed. But the article is not an essay, and that's an important note; I wish you had commented on the actual sources for the article, which are mostly primary (as is common for schools). If you had looked carefully, you would have seen a book cited, by Michael Thomason, which makes me think that veteran editor has worked on this article--and indeed, the history proves they did. Altairisfar, I see you everywhere: thank you, again, for all your good work. Now, Quarantineditor, I do not have that book and cannot see its content on Google Books, but it would be worth your while to get it from the library and see if you can add anything to the article, to beef up the history of the school during the Civil Rights era. The school was built to serve the entire county--but only the whites, no? So where did the Black students go? What all happened before the court order? A quick Google Books search proves that Leighton W. Smith Jr. attended the school, so I'll add him, and I see this, which makes me think that it's worth your while to go through the NYT archives, which you can do through AUM's library.
 * Yep--most of the school articles fortunately follow the guidelines laid out by the WikiProject, at WP:SCHOOLGUIDELINES.

Talk page is full of reasons why certain things from the article was removed. As far as it being a wikiproject, it is not considered one. My overall opinion on this article is that it is an okay article. It could have included more information on the different rewards and achievements different students and faculty members has received. Some minor improvements can be made to this article like updating some information, including different spots and clubs achievements.
 * No, that's not how that works: there IS a WikiProject for schools, and this article falls under it (WikiProject Schools), as well as WikiProject National Register of Historic Places and WikiProject Alabama.
 * Yes but are there any? No, we don't list clubs--that's only of minor relevance, only to the students of that school, but that is what the school has a website for. So, in general, yes there is room for improvement, and it will come from getting some book sources. BTW there's also some Google News hits, but those aren't always about things that are really of encyclopedic relevance. Dr Aaij (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)