User:Social Movement Explorer/Evaluate an Article

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

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen to evaluate this article because it relates directly to the current course I am taking this semester. This article provides useful information on the history of social movements and is a great example of a well-developed Wikipedia page.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:

This lead section is very strong because it begins with a concise definition of social movement. Upon reading the section further, it addresses more specific purposes of social movements and their role in society. This section incorporates sources and links to alternate Wikipedia pages that house information relating to social movements.

Content:

The content in this article is incredibly thorough and up-to-date. I opened up the revision history for this page and found edits that have been made within the last week. Information is in-depth, factual, properly cited, and links to several other topics that correspond to the general idea of social movements.

Tone and Balance:

The information I have read within this article is very unbiased and factual. This article has a very neutral tone, which is a critical component of a solidly developed Wikipedia page. Each subsection is well thought out and provides ample research on the topics.

Sources and References:

References and sources are thorough and displayed throughout the page. The works cites at the bottom of the article contains a wide variety of sources. Scholarly sources are used to support research provided within the page.

Organization and Writing Quality:

Writing throughout this article is professional and organized. Article is divided into many sections that expand further on more specific aspects of social movements.

Images and Media:

While there is not an overload of images and media, what is included is thoughtful and contributes to the flow of the article. Historical images, charts, and visuals are used to provide more context to the various subsections.

Talk Page Discussion:

This article's talk page is very professional and provides good insight and ideas for future edits. Wikipedia users state sections they would like to add and provide more information that could be used to strengthen portions of the page. I notice that much of the conversation within this talk page took place around a decade ago, so it seems as though this talk age has become less relevant over the years as the article has grown stronger.

Overall Impressions:

Overall, I would say that this is a very well developed article. This page is scholarly, has ample citations and references to other pages, incorporates media well, and looks very complete and thoughtful. Comparing this article to some of the stubs I have seen with lower grades, it is clear that a lot of time, effort, and contributions have been made to this page over the years that have increased its overall rating.