User:Thomas Lazuli Quickdagger/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Sarah Abdurrahman

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 because journalism is tangentially related to my course(research). I think that the article is important because the subject has made many contributions to a variety of media. Before reviewing the article with the guidelines above, my impression is that the article is concise and neat if a bit shorter than necessary.

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.)

Apologies for mistakes I make, this is my first time writing an evaluation and is therefore outlined for the convenience of you and myself.

(Lead in) The lead in is short and it does not mention the major headings of the article but it is concise and contains no information that the rest of the article doesn't.

(Content) The article's most recent sources is a year old. The body of the report could probably be filled out as it consists of 4 sections with a sum total of 12 sentences, though this could be a result of a lack of sources to draw from.

(Tone) The article successfully talks about a contentious event in the subjects life without appearing biased.

(Sources and references) The first source is a quote taken from another source. It might be more prudent taking the quote from the original interview if possible. Otherwise all sources are second or even first sources including actual interviews with the subject.

(Organization and writing quality) The article is clear and is organized into well defined sections.

(Images and media) There are no images in the article at this time.

(Talk page of article) The article is part of a journalism wiki project but there isn't an active discussion I could find. there is only a note that this article is of low importance to the project.

(Overall impressions) The article is well organized and well written with credible sources and a neutral point of view. The community does not seem interested with the article at this time. Some sections such as early childhood could use extra information and the article at large could use images to fill it out but otherwise this article is well-made.