User:Sydsor/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Editing User:Jenneizzay/Dr. Carolyn Barcus - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I wanted to review this article as it is on a person whose work I am interested in. I also found this topic interesting considering Dr. Barcus attended Utah State University.

Evaluate the article
Lead section: The lead section is accurate and provides a quick one sentence overview of the subject. It is concise and contains information that is also found in other sections of the article. It doesn't contain an overview of the article's major sections, but I don't think this is necessary considering the nature and length of the article.

Content: The content of the article is relevant to the topic. It is not overly detailed or too concise. The article could contain more information about the subject's career/research, but it appears that this section of the article is forthcoming and will be completed soon, as there is a heading for this section. The article's focus on a Native American psychologist meets criteria for topics related to historically underrepresented populations. The information is up to date as it references a source that was published this year.

Tone and balance: The article is written in a neutral tone and does not appear to overrepresent or be biased towards any particular viewpoint. Nothing in the article attempts to convince a reader of any particular viewpoint. The article focuses on reporting objective facts about the subject's life.

Sources and references: The article currently cites two secondary sources, one book and one article published in a peer reviewed journal. Authors of sources are diverse, and one of the publications was published as recently as two months ago. There is currently information in the article that is not supported by a reference, but this appears to be related to the article still being in progress. The links to the articles are functional.

Organization and writing quality: The article is well written. The article contained one typo that I corrected. The article is organized in a way that makes sense. However, the career section could be reordered to come before the research section to improve the flow of information.

Images and Media: There are no images in this article, so this section is not applicable.

Talk page discussion: There are currently no conversations on the talk page.

Overall impressions: The article's overall status appears to be in progress. Strengths of the article include its' tone and reliance on up to date secondary sources from reliable publications. Areas for improvement of the article include its' need for more information on the subject's career and research, and potentially reorganizing the headings to improve flow.