User:131.91.4.40/Evaluate an Article

Name of Article: Alternatives to animal testing

I have chosen this article to evaluate because I am curious to see if life can move forward without having to use live animals for testing, I know its one of the only ways to allow science to grow but if there are alternatives I would like to know and see if its possible test experiments other than on animals.

Lead:

Yes the lead includes a very well put together introductory sentence to the topic.

Yes the lead does include a brief description of the articles major sections.

No the lead does not include any information that is not present in the article.

the lead is concise.

Content:

After reading the article I would say that the content is relevant to the topic.

The content could be updated maybe in information needed to see what are the dangers of animal testing.

I think that the content in the articles all relevant to the topic.

Tone and Balance:

The article for the most part sounds pretty neutral, the only thing I would say that in the lead the way the author goes about sharing the information made it sound like yes, there are alternatives to animal testing but... animal testing would be the best way to go about it. Thats what I picked up.

I wouldn't say that there is a strong claim leaning one way or the other, but for example in the section of Cell Culture and Tissue Engineering, the author goes to explain some alternatives to animal testing but also claims that those alternatives still somewhat have to use animals.

In the section of Skin Absorption there is only one sentence, I feel like there could be more information there.

No the article does not attempt to persuade the reader one way or the other.

Sources and References:

Yes the sources are backed up by reliable secondary sources

The Author could have used more academic sources

I skimmed through the sources and all the dates were Fromm roughly from 2014 on.

yes some of the links I tried worked just fine.

Organization:

The article could be structured in a clearer way

Grammar or spelling isn't my strong suit but from looking at the article everything seemed to be in order.

Yes the article is well orginanized.

Images and Media:

The pictures that were included did help but more pictures could be added.

Yes, the two pictures were captioned well.

Yes, the images align with Wikipedias copyright regulations.

Yes, the pictures are visually appealing.

Checking the Talk Page:

The conversations in the talk page were critiques that could make the article better

I do not believe this article is with any wiki projects

Wiki is much more articulate than we are in class.

Overall Impressions:

The articles overall status is a C class

The articles strengths include a well balanced organized structure, for the most part it did not try to sway you one way or the other.

The article can be improved by having more pictures added and by extending some of the shorter sections with more relevant information.

This article is on the more well developed side but could use improvement.