User:Sebastien Philemon/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Kisor v. Wilkie

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am generally interested in administrative law, and this was one of the most impactful opinions in recent years. Furthermore, this article matters as it outlines a case that has set key boundaries in how administrative agencies can influence the law. Administrative law has been under a magnifying glass in the Supreme Court in recent years, and there are even more impactful cases before the court during this current term. This is why my final project revolves around an administrative law case. My first impression of this article is that it is absolutely not a stub, it is well researched, and it appears to also provide all the necessary information that a researcher would want. I did find a typo, however, and this along with the usage of more relevant media can be a way that this article can still improve.

Evaluate the article
This article on Kisor v. Wilkie is well done overall. The lead in appears to be generally satisfactory. The topic sentence achieved its goal on concisely and clearly describing the topic, however the remainder of the lead in does not give a specific description of the article's remaining sections. This lack of an outline, however, is not necessarily detrimental to the lead in given that its substance does such a sufficient job of concisely providing an overview of the case.

The content of the actual article was also sufficient. By providing background on the laws in question, the facts of the case, and the proceedings before the Supreme Court, this article's content was entirely relevant. The content appeared to be entirely up to date, did not appear to have much in terms of missing material, and appeared to achieve its goal of providing a holistic summary of this Supreme Court case.

Moreover, the neutral tone of this article also worked well. There were no clear signs of bias or over/underrepresentation of a particular school of thought. Overall, the author did not show any signs that they were either pleased or displeased with the outcome of the case.

The article also makes good usage of sources for the information that it is describing. There is a fair amount of case law that is cited along with citations to reputable news outlets and other secondary sources. There does not appear to be any missing gaps in either information presented or the sources that are cited.

Given that the article succeeds in providing a holistic summary of this court case, it follows that the organization and writing quality of the article is also sufficient. The article was able to describe both background information along with the Supreme Courts reasoning in a way that was clear, concise, and showed no bias. I found one typo in the very last sentence of the article ("property rather than properly"), but the writing was fine apart from this.

There also is not much use of media, but that wasn't necessarily necessary here.