User:Reesemclellan/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Andy Schor

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 it because the article is missing a lot of accomplishments of Andy Schor. There are no dates which makes it very confusing to try and follow along. My preliminary impression was that the article was hard to follow.

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 does give a solid overview of what is written. The problem is the article needs more information so ideally the lead should contain more because the entire page should contain more.

Although there is a ton of content missing, the information is relatively up to date. The issue is the article lists how long Andy Schor was in a position for instead of listing a start and end date and what he did in that position.

The article does appear to be neutral, probably because the article does not have many claims. It does not seem to be persuasive.

The article is not well written, and very hard to follow. If I were to try to make it easier to understand I would have done it chronologically and added dates to help the reader understand.

The page includes one photo of Andy Schor and the caption and information beneath it is very informative.

Overall the article did not provide a lot of information that was useful. It even repeated that he was on the board of commissioners twice.