User:Sdp543/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Les Claypool)

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 like Les Claypool, saw it on the big page under the C alphabetical category. Original impression was it was well made, and it matters because it documents a famous musician who is really popular and still playing today.

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.)

Most of the article is well put together, has an overview of him, who he is, as well as all of the projects he has worked on, including the band he is known for Primus. The lead is perfect, little to no improvements to be made there. Content is good, it at least let me know who he is, but is rather lackluster on personal and early years, as well as bass playing technique, which is why Les Claypool is ever brought up anyway, That's what people want to know about him, so a bigger technique section would help a lot. The tone is neutral, at least in the more important parts, in some places the tone is slightly uplifting, which I am a fan of. The rest is pretty perfect with how a Wikipedia page should look. Overall it is a good article, but is missing in a few key spots that are important if you want to get to know who Les Claypool is without listening to much of his music. Even so, I would know more about Les Claypool and who he was even if I were a first time reader.