User:Rbrasted/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Black-topped pottery

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I have some basic interest in pottery, and thought that as an outsider to the topic of African archaeology, it might be more approachable to me than focusing on a specific site. This article feels important and relevant, as it seems like this type of object has clearly been found at several different sites, and there is clearly a decent amount of information/discussion surrounding it

Evaluate the article
My overall impression of the article is one that has an overall solid foundation in terms of sources/information provided, but could still use some stylistic polish.


 * The lead feels well done. It was concise and easy to understand, though as an outsider with little background knowledge, I feel like it could have benefited from a link to a relevant Wikipedia page during the comparison to the "Egyptian hes-jar" (if such an article exists). I also feel like it would be worth mentioning the time period when this style began to wane (as you mention in your chronology).
 * The content proper is mostly solid. It gives a good overview of information relating to the subject, though the Archaeological chronology section feels a bit bare. I think it would be relatively easy to expand with the sources you already use, such as your mention of Elephantine in the lead. If the sources allow, it might be worth developing a separate section overviewing the most prominent locations where this pottery style has been found at (just Elephantine and Nabta Playa, or...)
 * The tone is felt very neutral. There were some sections of the article that felt overly short, but I feel this could be mostly alleviated by restructuring the section contents and working forward from there.
 * The article is well-cited, using sources from scientific journals and other reputable sources.
 * There were some parts of the organization and writing that I felt could be improved. I'd recommend rephrasing/removing most of the direct quotes - the information in them doesn't feel technical or personal enough to justify keeping the source's exact words. I think the structure of the article could be improved by adding the aforementioned locations section, as well as breaking up the Technologies section. Personally, I would move the talk about climate shifts to the Archaeological chronology section, create a new "Appearance and Techniques" section with subsections for form, finishing techniques, and an explanation of the firing style. The debate the black top's purpose seems long enough to justify its own section or subsection.)
 * The images used in the article were attractive and illustrative.
 * The talk page seems to be blank.