User:Tykerriagrey/Evaluate an Article

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

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 mainly because I am getting my faith back strong in Jesus. Growing up, I always in the church. We went every Sunday, Vacation Bible School during the summertime, singing in the choir, usher and the list goes on. As I grew older and moved out on my own, I veered away from church after returning towards the military and going off to college. I could not find a church that felt like home to me, so I quit going. I wanted to learn about the different types of religion, where it came from, originated etc. I enjoyed reading the article because it talks about the study of religion, the people in which contributed to it, and mainly how the study became about.

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.)

The article does have a lead section. It talks about the topic and what it is and how the study of religion is defined. The lead talks about how it originated and how different scholars played a part into the topic of the religion.

I do feel as if the articles content is relevant to the topic. It talks about how religion originated within the United States within the 1960s, and who was the first person to talk about it. The article is neutral being that it doesn't say one religion is better than the other. Instead the article more so just speaks more so on the study of the religion. It also speaks briefly on the sociology of the religion, how law and religion plays a factor as well. Some of the sources which are talked about within the article, some of them date to the 1970s and some date to the early 2000s as well.

The article is broken down into different sections in which it does label what each section is about. I love how the information was presented in a way in which it flows together, and isn't just all over the place. The picture that is concluded in the article is of the first professor at Oxford and author of the Introduction to Science and Religion.