User talk:HervGerv/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?

Biblical archaeology.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I'm Christian and I thought looking into archaeology on the Bible sounded interesting.

Evaluate the article

The opening is concise and gives the reader a good idea about the article's topic. It is also mostly referenced and all links seem to work. However, some sentences in the article exhibit an informal and condescending tone, especially on the topic of history using words such as "obviously." The origins of the history of archaeology are not referenced. The images are nice and provide a good visual example on the topic. They are captioned in detail to further enhance this. Overall, the article is easy to read, well-organized, and is filled with quotes and references that allow the reader to do further research on the topic. The main issue with this article is the "history" section, which is written in a style unlike the rest of the article, as well as demeaning. The section should be altered and feature the actual history of biblical archaeology.

I have actually no idea what I'm doing--HervGerv (talk) 04:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Which article are you evaluating? Aristotle's views on women.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate? The article title sounded hilarious so I had to look at it.

Evaluate the article The article opening simply restates the title and does not give me a good idea as to what I am about to read. Otherwise, the article seems to be well written, well cited, well quoted, and has relatively little bias. However, one of the sources has been deemed unverifiable and should thus be changed. On the section with this unverified source, the author seems to insert some of his own thoughts saying that some of Aristotle's theories make some sense, which should be omitted so as to remain as unbiased as possible. Otherwise, the article is mostly without issue.

I still don't know what I'm doing--HervGerv (talk) 05:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)