User:WhereIsGreen/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Voting gender gap in the United States

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article was relevant to the course topic. It is something we have briefly discussed in class as well.

Evaluate the article
Lead section: The first sentence of the lead section of this article is concise and clearly defines the article's topic. It does include a table that has the major sections of the article listed, but it includes no descriptions or explanations other than the titles of those sections, which could be added. The lead section contains a brief statement that includes content that is not further discussed within the article, in an attempt to clear up a common misconception, so this should either be removed or expanded upon later in the article. The lead section as a whole is concise and does not include too much detail. Overall, though it could use a few edits, the lead section of this article works.

Content: This article has relevant, up-to-date information with no glaringly missing or irrelevant information. The article is talking about an equity gap, though it could be more explorative into the effects of the gender gap itself.

Tone and Balance: This article has a very neutral tone almost to a fault. It is almost entirely statistical facts that have no bias or viewpoint but just are. As such, there is no attempt to persuade the reader in any way.

Sources and References: The facts of the article are backed by a wide range of relevant and recent sources representing a large piece of the literature. The authors of the sources are a diverse group as well. However, some of the sources are articles from news websites rather than peer-reviewed journal articles, which would be more reliable and trustworthy than news (especially cable news like CNN) and should be used instead. The links do work.

Organization and writing quality: This article is concise, clear, easy to read, and well organized. There were no grammatical or spelling errors that I caught.

Images and Media: There are no images in this article. Though I am not sure what kind of image might best represent the gender gap in voting in the United States, I think the article would greatly benefit from such a visual.

Talk page discussion: Most of the conversation about this article are recommendations for edits such as clarity on certain subjects, many of which have already been fixed, and the need for visual aids in the article. None of the discussion is similar to what we talked about in class, though that is mostly because there is a lot of discussion over the semantics of the article and the need for additional stats.

Overall Impression: Overall, this article is decent. It needs some improvements in visual aid, source reliability, and the need to explore the effects of the topic presented. This article is strong in its concise and clear language and organization. In terms of completeness, I would rate this article as slightly underdeveloped, but well on its way to be fully developed.