User:Vadimber/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I evaluate the article on Observational Cosmology: Observational cosmology.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article for my evaluation because I am interested in cosmology in general and in observational cosmology in particular. Cosmology is a subsection of astronomy studying the evolution and properties of the Universe as a whole. Observational cosmology is focused on confirming theoretical cosmological predictions through various sky observations, including observations through telescopes and interferometers. It is important to have a Wikipedia article describing the history, methods and obtained results of the field. My first impression from the article is rather positive, even though some of its part lack connections between the links and information provided to the main topic of the article.

Lead section
The Lead section of the article is very short and is consisted solely from the definition of Observational Cosmology. I think it should also include a brief description of the Observational Cosmology subtopics discussed in the article.

Content
The content of the article is relevant and, as far as I know, up-to-date. All information in the article is balanced between sections, although some of its parts have, as I think, have excessively many links to other Wikipedia articles which are not essential for the main topic of the article. Some details in the article are also, in my opinion, excessive in overall view.

Tone and Balance
The tone of the article is neutral, I have not noticed any personal opinions presented in the article. Different scientific viewpoints are equally presented in the article.

Sources and References
All the facts in the article are supported by corresponding references. The number of sources is large and they cover different aspects of the topic. Many of them are peer-reviewed articles. Overall, the sources appear to be reliable, even though many times it refers to the mid-20th century science articles, which may be quite outdated today. Most of the links work, although not all of them.

Organization and Writing Quality
The overall writing quality is good, no grammatical and spelling mistakes notices. The division into subtopics is thorough and easy-to-read, but sometimes the relation to the main topic of the article becomes obscure after the division.

Images and Media
There is only one image in the article. The image is well-captioned and aesthetically laid out, but I think more images can be added to the article to better visualize its content.

Talk Page Discussion
There is no discussion going on about the article. It is related to the WikiProject Physics (rated C-Class / High Importance), and WikiProject Astronomy / Cosmology (rated C-Class / High Importance).

Overall Impression
I would give the article overall rating C, which agrees with its assessment by the WikiProjects it is related to. There is a lot of credible and related information in the article, but it still requires some reformatting, deletion of loosely related material and addition of information independent from other Wikipedia articles. However, looks like there is no current development of the article.