User:Ralamie/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)1977 Egyptian bread riots

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 article because this is the article I have chosen for my final essay. This article matters because it is a historical happening and these are always important to write about. My preliminary impression was that this article is very short and thus might be lacking important information.

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.)

LEAD

- The first sentence does not explain what the subject is about, but rather goes into detail in something less important (namely that it had an impact on big cities in Egypt).

- Rest of the lead has enough information and not too overly detailed.

CONTENT

-the content is last updated on 21 January this year so still up to date.

-the most important information is stated in this article, but there could have been more depth into how the government reacted to the riots and how the government dealt with it. This could be a paragraph itself

-there could be an explanation how the people decided to go on the streets to riot, because this did not happen a lot in Egypt. Also an explanation of how Nasser did his policies, as this was what the people wanted back.

-there could be more information on why the people could not pay the extra money. So more information about how much money people usually get payed and what they can get with that money. So more depth into the severeness of the raise in prices.

-no information about who organized the riots.

-no information about what kind of different people came to the riots.

TONE & BALANCE

-tone seems neutral. There is however not much elaboration on the choice of the government to do this openness policy.

SOURCES

-only four sources. The newest source is still 15 years old. One of the links does not work.

ORGANIZATION AND WRITING QUALITY

-no spelling or grammar mistakes. Furthermore clearly written.

-sections not nicely divided.

IMAGES & MEDIA

-I believe there is only one relevant picture and this could be too little. This picture also does not provide very useful text.

TALK PAGE DISCUSSIONS

-it is seen as a low-importance article

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS

-The article's status is that it is OK, but lacking.

-The article's strength is that the information given is probably correct.

-The article can be improved by giving more information, more pictures with good description, and better division in paragraphs

-The article is underdeveloped /poorly developed.