User:Ywei62uwo/sandbox

Evaluation of "Monkgomery"

The Wikipedia article regarding the children's puppet toy "Montgomery" is in need of fixing based on the criteria identified in the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure. Although the the article is relatively informative, it requires additional information and a few touch ups on the language. For example, the first sentence in the lead section awkwardly describes Monkgomery as "a puppet children's toy" when it should read "a children's puppet toy". Furthermore, it is also missing a few key facts about Monkgomery that deems important for the lead section. For instance, after doing some research myself, I learned that the velcro on the puppet's hands is often used to drape around a person's neck as a way of playing with the toy. Monkgomery also makes jokes as a form of play. Both these facts could be included in the lead section to form a more holistic view about the puppet.

Almost the entire history section of the article needs revising. Although the information provided is adequate, most of the sentences in this section are wordy and awkward. The first sentence of the article could be broken down into two separate sentences in order to make the article more clear and concise. The sentence regarding Dr. Bingo and Space Bingo kits could also be revised by taking out the additional "were supposed to be", making it less wordy. Furthermore, this section includes an unsourced opinion, describing the toy being "more cuddly for children" due to having "no gears and no movable parts".

The last section of the article requires more organization. The third paragraph of the article diverts from talking about mechanics and parts to talking about the Hasbro company competing with Teddy Ruxpin. This could be a section on its own instead of using up the space in the "Mechanics and Parts" section.

On a final note, all paragraphs require more references. The only reference in this article is a reference to the release date of Monkgomery. References for the mechanics and parts should be provided as well as the quote in the last section regarding Monkgomery's packaging.

Overall, the article is very informative but requires revision in language, section organization, and needs to include more references.