User:RutgersRoss27/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
LinkedIn

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The reason I chose this article is because of how useful Linkedin is as a tool for networking. With Linkedin people are capable of connecting to people and in turn improve their chances of having a successful career in their respective fields. As such it is important for the Wikipedia article for Linkedin to be up to date with relevant information for the user. This ensures that when people check the article they can fully understand the history of Linkedin, how to use it, and whether or not Linkedin would be good for them. My preliminary impression of the Linkedin page is that it is very well done. It provides deep insight into Linkedin's history including previous controversies surrounding the site. It also gave great information on features of the site and how they are used. I also appreciated the fact that the references used were listed at the bottom as they add to the quality of the page itself.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is very well done. It explains what the company is as well as how it started and how it grew which connects to the rest of the information in the page. It also gives a brief outline of what the site does and uses terminology that the website itself would use such as "connections". The content in the article is full of useful information and isn't too long or to short. It has parts dedicated to its history, features on the site, how to use the site, as well as reception and criticism Linkedin has recieved. Each section is descriptive and isn't overbearing making it easy for a user to read. When it comes to the article's neutrality I find it to be neutral. This is evident in the fact that it posts both the sites accomplishments as well as having a section dedicated to Linkedin's criticisms and controversies. As for Sources they are listed at the bottom if they were used in the article. They seem current and are also sourced from reputable places too. I did check a few links at random and they work just fine. The writing quality of the article is good too with little to no errors and is written in a way that is easy to read. The organization of the article, with it being sectioned off with each section having a bold header, bullet points, and punctuation make it well organized. There aren't too many images on the page itself, which is fine in my opinion, and the ones that do exist on the page add to it without being too much. The talk page doesn't have much too it except for a few discussion with one of them being a discussion regarding excessive details in the "User profile Network" section. I don't believe that there was too much detail in this section in my own opinion however. Overall my impressions are that the article is very well done. It provides a great variety of useful information to users about Linkedin's history, usage, and reception both positive and negative. As for improvements I would add a photo or two of the GUI of the homepage for example in my opinion so users would know what they are seeing for example.