User:Smichael263/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Odd Future

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 I thought it would be fun to evaluate. I am a big fan of music and enjoy reading and learning about different musicians. This group was influential in my middle and high school years and I thought it would be a fun nostalgia trip to go back and look at it.

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.)

Lead section

While the lead section does a good job introducing the music collective and introducing some of the article, there is a lot in the lead section which the writers leave out in later sections. For example they discuss the tv show that the group participated in and leave out any mention of it in the main section of article. There is also a lot more they could include in the article like spinoff groups and other media forms that they contributed to. Additionally there are some innacuracies in the article for example the article states the group might still be together which they are not, there are several sources cited in the article that point out that the group is no more.

Content

I feel as though the content in the article is very sparse and could be heavily expanded. There is so much media that odd future had contributed to the scene. Several skit based shows, some skits with funnyordie, magazines, and clothing pop ups which it mentions nothing about.

Tone and balance

The tone of the article is balanced and neutral. I think that it is almost too neutral trying to include members who were much less relevant in the music they made. I feel as though they should have done a better job talking about the main members of the group like tyler, earl, frank, and syd.

Sources and references

They have a healthy amount of sources that they cite and use throughout the article.

Organization and writing quality

The article is poorly organized and could use a lot more sections in order to make the writing more clear and concise. Would have benefitted sections with all their projects and whatnot.

Images and media

Good amount of image and media

Talk page discussions

The talk page has some good things included but also is very unprofessional and hasn't been edited in a long time could use some more modern updates.

Overall impressions

Overall I would give the article a 5/10 it needs a little bit more work done but has good bones that can be easily expanded upon.