User:WVeitch/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Team 10

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Team 10 is an important organization within the development of architectural history, particularly in the post-WWII period.

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.)

This article has a good first sentence and subsequent explanatory sentence. I would like to see the lead section fleshed out a bit more, including some guiding philosophies of the group, or maybe a crowning achievement or theory that can be attributed to this group. It might be useful to include the key members of the group in the lead section. No mention or introduction is given to the other sections of the article. The two sentences that make up the lead section are clear and concise and should remain.

As far as I can tell, the content included in this article is up-to-date. It is surely relevant and valuable information -- there just isn't enough of it. As far as equity gaps, it could be good to highlight any members of Team 10 that could be identified as historically underrepresented.

The article does a good job of remaining neutral. It states the disparities between Team 10 and CIAM in a way that isn't value laden, but explanatory. It is important to understand Team 10's ideas in opposition to CIAM but not as better/worse than.

This article is lacking in sources. Only 4 are given and there are a couple places where a source is clearly needed. The article is nicely linked to other pages, particularly pages for each of the individual members.

I would love to see images providing examples of architectural theory that Team 10 championed.