User:Uhhlea/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The Sims 3 expansion packs

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this because I enjoy video games, and the article seemed in need of editing.

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.)

Lead Section: The lead section is a four sentence long paragraph saying there there were eleven expansion packs released for the sims three, all of which were published by Electronic Arts. The parish briefly describes the purpose of an expansion pack. It ends by detailing the release dates of the first and last expansion packs.

Content: The article lists every expansion packs released for the sims 3. Under each addition to the list, there are subsections that details things such as: gameplay, development, worlds, reception, additional features, music. Each subsection lists key elements of each expansion pack. Although I noticed that not all expansion packs lists information with multiple subsections. For example, University Life and Into the Future lacks a subsection about the reception to the new releases. Some expansions have information about the music added, others don't. On the right of the article at the top of the page, there is a chart showing how each pack was scored/ranked. At the top of the page, a warning says that the article has multiple issues such as not meeting notability guidelines and having poorly written sections.

Tone and Balance: The tone of the article is fairly neutral to me. It gives information about the sims 3 expansion packs without attempting to persuade the reader one way or another.

Sources and References: There are 104 sources in total. The first 18 sources are links from Metacritic and GameRankings. One source is a twit longer. One of the websites titled eagames.co.uk appears to be archived. Some links don't work and could be fixed. such as link 30 and link 22. Link 31 and 32 are the same source. Most of the sources are not current due to the release dates of the expansion packs being several years old. Some sections of the article go on for several sentences without citations.

Organization and Writing Quality: The article is broken down in sections that makes it easier to read and understand.

Images and Media: There are no images

Talk Page Discussion: There is a notice at the top that saying the article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games which is an effort to improve coverage of games on Wikipedia. The article was rated C class and is currently low importance on the projects importance scale. There appears to be history of merging in 2021. As for discussions, they appear to be archived and took place in October 2022. Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 25. As a result of some nominations, things were deleted.

Overall Impressions: The article appears to do a pretty good job at describing key points about each expansion pack. However I could see where it could be more detailed in some places and could use some additions in places