User:Sleepless oneironaut/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Deaf President Now

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 this article because it is a topic I've personally learned a lot about in the last two semesters, and I believed having some prior knowledge would help me to spot things to evaluate. The topic itself (Deaf President Now) is a very important topic with a huge impact on the historical and modern day status of the Deaf community and American Sign Language. The article is decent and has good detail, but could do with some expansion and some more citations.

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.)

Overall, the article here is decent. To start small, there are a few statements or claims made that I feel warrant a citation that go uncited. To be fair, I haven't gone through every cited source provided to see what information is present, so I can't speak on the quality of the actual sources, but in terms of the text itself it could use more citations to bolster credibility.

Taking a step back, though, and examining the larger scale structure: where is the "Impact" section? It starts out strong with a "Background" section followed by the "Protest" section, which contains in depth and comprehensive details, but then it's followed by an "Aftermath" section that is two sentences long. I'm fairly certain one of the pivotal events in the Deaf community's history had more aftermath than two sentences (which are both about the same, single point by the way).

TL;DR: the article gives a strong overview of the actual event Deaf President Now, but nowhere near enough information about the impacts or effects of the protest.