User:Tjordan15/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) George Town, Cayman Islands

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 for a couple of reasons. I have been to the Cayman Islands before and have visited George Town plenty of times. I believe this article matters because George Town is a hotspot for tourism and people who will potentially visit may want to know about it. My first impression was that is it seemed like an ok mediocre, mostly because it was fairly short and I thought of some ideas to improve its quality. it is a C-class article so this is what I expected it to be.

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.)

I thought the lead section wasn't bad. It could have been a little bit more descriptive in its summary of what will be in the articles main contents. It isn't overly detailed and the opening sentence clearly describes the article. The content is relevant to the topic, but I felt that more could have been added to increase the amount of info about the city. There are sections about transportation available that are lacking in content. I would choose to add more info or take the section out altogether to decrease the amount of irrelevant stuff/ words just to have on the page. Some of the information could be updated like the population and the GDP of the territory. Overall the article seems to be very neutral and unbiased. The tone is good because it states facts about the city and not tourist's opinions. There seems to be a lack of sources, There are several paragraphs that don't have a single reference in them. I'd like to believe that it is fairly easy to find a source for accessible topics like their tourism and finance. 4 of the 13 sources listed are in reference to the climate section alone when there are 6 main topics. This doesn't seem to be a good ratio of sources per section. The sources used are potentially out of date, most of them are before 2015. One of the links that I clicked on would not work. The images are well formatted and have quality captions but I think they need to be diversified or lessened to keep the up the appeal of them. Overall the writing is concise and clear/ easy to read. The article is organized well in a sense that topics easy lead to the next. I did not notice any grammar or spelling mistakes. Overall it was a good start, it gives basic information about the destination. In a sense it felt incomplete, more info could be added about George Town that even some frequent tourist wouldn't even know.