User talk:Willow1500/Evaluate an Article


 * Lead intro sentence is good and concise.
 * Lead doesn’t describe article’s major sections.
 * All the aspects of the topic have about the same weight of information.
 * The last section about the death and legacy could be rewritten with new information.
 * The content seems to be up to date.
 * It doesn’t deal with equity gaps.
 * Tone is neutral but article only mentions positive things about sangallo.
 * Personal life of sangallo isn’t mentioned.
 * The article’s positivity can make the reader think of sangallo as a very important person.
 * The article relies mostly on a single source and only has 3 different sources.
 * The content is well developed but more information could be added in general.
 * The images are well captioned and well laid out but more images are necessary.
 * All the sources are secondary and peer reviewed articles.
 * Picture of the palazzo Farnese I nominated to be deleted.
 * There are just 2 conversations about the article.
 * Sources don’t include historically marginalized individuals, they include 2 books and a jstor journal. The links work.