User:Rainyfield637/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Socrates

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 this specific article because I have always been highly interested in Socrates' philosophical methods, legacies, and his trial. It matters because his philosophy has been highly influential for discussions within our current society. The Socratic method is utilized in education and is useful for facilitating discussion and his view of ignorance and irony are deeply important. My preliminary impression of this article was that it is very vast, detailed, and all encompassing; as all of Socrates' philosophical elements are provided in a clear and detailed manner.

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 includes a clear and concise introductory topic as well as a brief descriptions of the upcoming topics. It rather concise and not overly detailed. The content is relevant to the topic and most of it is up to date, although some sections are quite dated. There is no content that doesn't belong. The article doesn't deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps and it doesn't address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics. The article is neutral and there are no biases present. There are no glaring underrepresented viewpoints and minority views are described as such. The article doesn't attempt to persuade. All the facts are backed up by secondary sources of information and the sources are thorough. Some of the sources aren't current and are in need of revision. There is an inclusion of diverse authors and there are quite a few "better" sources available. The links that I checked did work. the article is well written, concise, and easy to read. There are no errors in grammar present. The article is broken down into sections for each subject. Images are included that enhance the topic's understanding. The images are well-captioned. They are in compliance with the copyright regulations are are visually appealing. In the Talk Page, conversations related to additional sources for Socrate's biography was present along with an inquiry into his traveling away from Athens. The article is rated as "good" and is apart of several WikiProjects. The articles' status is "good" and its strengths are its detailed approach, vastness, concise nature, and neutral tone. the only matter where it could be improved is using some more modern sources as well as expanding on Socrate's early life as a student. I would argue that this article is very well developed.