User:Rroehl00/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating the following article: Lego

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 to evaluate this article because one of my favorite childhood memories is playing with Legos and it is something that holds a special place in my heart. I was curious as to what information the page includes and wished to learn more. There is no strong purpose of this article aside from informing Wikipedia users of various aspects of the Lego Company, what it makes, how the Lego toy brand has expanded over the years, among various other things. My first impression of the article was that it was well structured and had a wide variety of information posted, from design, history, and manufacturing, to themes of toys, amusement parks and movies/TV shows. There are also many more cited sources and random facts on the article than I expected there to be, such as, "600 billion Lego pieces being produced as of July 2015".

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.)

Considering the aspects of the article, I have to say it is well-written and constructed in a way that allows ease of reading. The Lead of the article is informative and brief, including relevant details someone looking for a brief introduction to Lego would be able to gain from reading the Lead. I don't believe the Lead contains any over detailed information and has further explanations within subsequent sections.

The content in the article is relevant to the topic including multiple aspects to provide a more rounded perspective of what The Lego Company encompasses. I would say as far as content being up to date, it seems as though some of the factual claims being made regarding how many pieces have been made, and certain landmark experiences being done by the company are only updated as relevant sources become available which may not be updated on an annual basis. Due to this, I think it is a little hard to designate whether or not the information is fully up to date, however many reviewers follow this article and the Talk page seems to have information that is readily addressed and I suspect as information becomes available it is updated.

As far as neutral tone consistently being employed throughout the article, there is no bias or leading terminology that I witnessed in the article. Although for this topic, the information being presented is not very biased as it is mostly informing on facts about the company itself, its history, and business ventures. With this being said, there is no persuasive tone used throughout the article and the writing is done.

For the sources used within the article, the sources that I chose to check were mainly online news articles reporting on specific updates of Lego accomplishments. Unfortunately, for this topic, there are not many secondary literature sources and most of the sources come from reports media sources. With this in mind, the article editors have done a great job of ensuring the sources they use come from various different media outlets, not staying biased to one outlet or company and gathering from both larger, well-known reporters such as CNN.com, Lego.com, and TIME and other lesser known outlets like Brick Recycler. This helps to ensure a vast approach to the information they gather, trying to increase the credibility and neutrality of the source reporting facts. Again, due to the nature of the material of the article, peer-reviewed articles are not readily available for information on the topic. The article is well-written and has very few grammar errors.

The article includes many images with good descriptions relevant to the sections and topics they are indicated for. I would comment and say that some additional photos could be added for the theme parks, Lego games, and films and television to help orient readers to some popular culture items visually they may be familiar with while reading the article. These can include things like The Lego Movie poster and Lego: Star Wars television series images among many others.

On the Talk page there is discussion about Quatro addition and how only some English pronunciations are listed in the article, seeing as Lego originated in Dutch. The article is highly rated on the Wikiprojects scale and is indeed on Wikiprojects, so it makes sense that it is well-written and has discussion to include additional information and edits to improve the article without mass criticism from other editors.

Overall, I think the article is good and does not have an immense amount of room for improvement. I would suggest adding in more language friendly inclusion of terms to allow for the full picture that Lego encompasses rather than mostly English terminology. Aside from this, the mention to include information about Lego Quattro is feedback I think article editors should take into consideration and implement seeing as this is a niche, but true aspect of Lego and can provide interesting information to Wikipedia reader interested in learning more about Lego and its history. Aside from this I would suggest frequently updating the page to fall more in line with the current times and what is relevant. A specific example is including images of movies and television shows Lego has done as these were extremely popular and are a good source of commonality that readers can recognize.