User:AMousou/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
List of dinosaur genera

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The article is fairly new and short. I noticed that the article history shows the first edit being June 2023 and the last edit shown is September 2023. The article is still being built and is a great start. Other Wiki Users can contribute and provide more information and images of the different dinosaurs.

Lead Section:
At the beginning of the reading, Wiki readers understand that they are about to read about the "diverse" dinosaurs that existed. The article goes one to talk about the various periods that dinosaurs first appeared and their appearance going forward. The first section goes on to mention the next section will be lists of the dinosaurs. The reading also specifies that the dinosaurs that are included are also those that have been posed as not valid. The lead incorporates information that will be present in the article and provides a good amount of detail. Overall, the lead ensures to introduce the reading, briefly discusses the various periods that the dinosaurs listed were from, and informs us that the list of dinosaurs includes those valid and invalid.

Content:
The article's content is relevant to the topic as after the lead, the article lists all the valid and invalid dinosaurs. The list also includes links that you can click on to get more information on the dinosaur listed. The content is up to date as the last edit made was September 12, 2023. The content that I believe is missing is stating which listed dinosaurs are considered to be valid or invalid. There are not equity gaps that I have noticed from the article. The article does address a topic that is well known. However, the article does address historical populations that are not usually discussed with the topic of dinosaurs as it lists all the very known and unknown dinosaurs (that are either valid or invalid).

Tone and Balance:
The article contains a neutral tone that lists the various periods dinosaurs moved about Earth and the list of those dinosaurs. There are no claims that appear heavily biased towards a particular position. I know this because the article mentions that there is a current dispute between valid and invalid dinosaurs and that all of them are listed. The article shares both sides and includes all information (meaning listing all dinosaurs and not just listing the dinosaurs that are considered by some as valid and considered by some as invalid). All viewpoints are present. There are no viewpoints that are overrepresented; the article is balanced. The article does not act in a way to persuade people but shows that it is used to inform people.

Sources and References:
All the facts in the article are backed up by other information pages from Wikipedia and peer-reviewed journals. The sources that are used are thorough, where information on the topic was taken from published journals. Majority of the sources are from 2021 to 2023 and are recent. The sources show diverse set of authors and individuals on the topics. Due to all of these sources being fairly recent, it shows that the Wiki article is updated with peer-reviewed journals that have the most recent information. There are many more articles that can be used that can be used to inform the page. The links provided in the references all work and bring you to the specific Wiki page or peer-reviewed journal.

Organization and Writing Quality:
The information is all organized and written well. The work written is clear, concise, easy to read, and professional; it is very informative. There are no grammatical or spelling errors that I can find while reading. The article is also well-organized where the lead section gives us an introduction to what the Wiki page is about; the article then proceeds to list all the dinosaurs in alphabetical order.

Image and Media:
The article does include images; however, more images can and should be included. The article lists the many dinosaurs present, however, only some of those dinosaurs listed have an image. The lack of images can be due to those not being available. Under the few images, there are captions. The images do not adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations as no source is provided for the image. The images are spaced out in no particular pattern and appear randomly down the right side of the page.

Talk Page Discussion:
There are not many conversations on the Talk Page, however, the two that took place are interesting. One individual mentioned that some primary sources are not cited and brings that to light. Another individual explains why some images were not appropriate and reason why they changed some of those inappropriate images for the article. The article is currently on the featured list and has been removed due to not citing sources and more. It does appear to be a WikiProject.

Overall Impressions
The article needs more work. Individuals need to go back and make sure everything is cited including those images. The article does a great job in introducing what the purpose of the article is. The article is poorly developed due to it lacking citations; the article can be improved by including the necessary sources that are missing.

~

Option 1

 * Article Title:
 * Urban evolution

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?[edit]
The article was chosen to evaluate because there is room for it to improve. The article has not been rated and it is fairly new. The article has a completeness score of 66; and the average views per day is 6. The article is fairly short with not many sources; and the article Talk Page is not very active. I believe that my group can contribute to the article and make it more informative, using more sources, and images.

Lead Section:
The lead section includes an introductory sentence that defines what urban evolution is. The definition itself will allow readers to assume that the article's topic will be about urban evolution. The first sentence is informative. The lead includes a brief description of the article's major sections; it does not refer to them directly by title, however, the lead introduces major topics discussed in the major sections of hte article. The major sections that appear are the following: Urbanization, Urban Evolution Selective Agents, Urban Evolution Examples, and References. The lead does not include information that is not present in the article. The lead is concise.

Content:
The content of the article is relevant to the topic of urban evolution. The content seems to look up to date, however, more information can be included. The article references data on adaptations from 2021. The article seems to reference adaptations that may not be from urban environments. By reading and viewing the article, there do not seem to be any equity gaps; the article does address topics related to urban evolution amount populations that would not normally be referenced as the author included populations that have been claimed to be adapting. The author includes claims that not have been proven regarding animals adapting to the urban environments.

Tone and Balance:
For the most part, the article is neutral; there is one part of the article where it does not come off as neutral. The author references something to be "interesting," this may be considered biased toward that particular adaptation. The author includes information on populations that have been said to be adapting to the urban environment, those that are possibly being adapted and trying to be proven, and those that have not been proven as adaptations. For this reason, all viewpoints or stances on various populations adapting in urban environments are included. More information can be added to these sections as there are definitely more populations that are not mentioned here. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader, it is more informative than persuasive; however, there is a moment in the article where the author references as something being interesting.

Sources and References
All the facts in the article seem to be backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. Majority of the articles are peer-reviewed articles that are focused on urban evolution and various populations. Only one article that is cited is not very current and it is from 1999. Majority of the articles are from the early 2000s. The sources seem to be written by a diverse group of authors; not many of the sources are from historically marginalized individuals, however, some of the sources reference these individuals. There are other sources that can and should be included. A few of the sources have been listed under this section. The links under the referenes work well and redirect you to the article/ reading.

Sources that can be added:


 * 1) Diane Toomey. April 5, Diane Toomey, Diane Toomey, Diane Toomey is an award-winning public radio journalist who has worked at Marketplace, Toomey →, M. about D., Robbins, J., & Robbins, J. (n.d.). Urban darwinism: How species are evolving to survive in cities. Yale E360. https://e360.yale.edu/features/urban-darwinism-how-species-are-evolving-to-survive-in-cities
 * 2) Evolution of life in Urban Environments | Science. (n.d.-a). https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aam8327
 * 3) Johnson MTJ, Munshi-South J. Evolution of life in urban environments. Science. 2017 Nov 3;358(6363):eaam8327. doi: 10.1126/science.aam8327. PMID: 29097520.

Organization and Writing Quality:
The article is not well organized and not easy to read. The article needs to be organized with headings, bolding, and more. There are no spelling or grammatical errors that I have found while reading the article.

Image and Media:
There are no images that enhance the understanding of the topic. The article should have images to make it more informative and engaging.

Talk Page Discussion:
There are no discussions going on behind the scenes about how to represent the topic. There are two people that have shown to have edited the article but there are no discussions happening. The article has not yet been rated as it is fairly new. Wikipedia discusses the topic in a detailed manner and including so much information on the topic. In class, we discuss this as an overall topic, however, not as detailed as the article.

Overall Impressions
The article needs to be improved and it is fairly new; it has no status rating. The article is very informative and shares many populations that are adapting, may be adapting, and those who have been claimed to be adapting. The article is underdeveloped; I would not say it is poorly developed. The article is a great start, however, there needs to be more added. More sources that are relevant, images, and information need to be added; the article needs to be organized; and biased stances/words should be removed.

~

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Urban Wildlife


 * Article Evaluation

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The article is chosen to evaluate as it is a class C article and there is room for improvement. The article has a completeness score of 57 and gets an average of 75 views per day. There are some sections of the article that are well informed and some that are lacking information. This article an be improved my adding more information.

Lead Section:
The lead section of the article begins with an overall definition of the meaning of urban wildlife. The lead section does mention topics that will be described and descriptions, however, it is overly detailed. It is so detailed and informative that you are overwhelmed.

Content:
The article's content is relevant to the topic and seems up-to-date. There is content missing under some of the subheadings. For example, for the subtitles of Japan, Hawaii, and New Zealand they do not have much information regarding how urban environments are affecting the evolution or natural selection of animals.There is an equity gap as some areas around the world had more information regarding the relationship between animals and urban environments; more information needs to be added in sections that are underdeveloped.

Tone and Balance:
The article presents a neutral tone and there are no claims that are heavily biased toward a particular position. It does lack information regarding various countries related to urban environments and animals. The article works more to inform people and not persuade.

Sources and References:
There are 55 references total for the article; some of the sources date back to 2003 to all the way to 2021. The articles do reflect the available literature on the topic. The authors do seem diverse; I do not see any historically marginalized individuals included as sources, however, these individuals could be included as a reference in the other sources listed. The links do work when clicked on them as well.

 Sources that can be added: 


 * 1) Contributor, G. (2020, December 5). Urban wildlife: Threats and benefits of our interaction. Greentumble. https://greentumble.com/urban-wildlife-threats-and-benefits
 * 2) Caroline Isaksson   Senior Lecturer and Associate Professor in Biology, & Petra Sumasgutner Post-doc fellow at the Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology. (2022, September 13). How rapid urbanisation is changing the profile of wildlife in cities. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/how-rapid-urbanisation-is-changing-the-profile-of-wildlife-in-cities-58818
 * 3) How urban expansion threatens wildlife and assists climate change. World Economic Forum. (n.d.). https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/massive-urban-expansion-threatens-natural-habitats/
 * 4) Janet Marinelli, July 1, Janet Marinelli, Janet Marinelli, Janet Marinelli is an award-winning independent journalist who was director of scientific and popular publications at Brooklyn Botanic Garden for 16 years. She has written and edited several books on imperiled species and the efforts to save them. She als, Marinelli →, M. about J., Robbins, J., & Robbins, J. (n.d.). Urban refuge: How cities can help solve the biodiversity crisis. Yale E360. https://e360.yale.edu/features/urban-refuge-how-cities-can-help-solve-the-biodiversity-crisis
 * 5) Jackson, J. (2023, September 6). Finding the balance between urbanization, climate change and wildlife conservation. Phys.org. https://phys.org/news/2023-09-urbanization-climate-wildlife.html#:~:text=The%20study%20finds%20that%20urbanization%2C%20along%20with%20human-driven,local%20scales%2C%20reducing%20species%20occupancy%2C%20richness%2C%20and%20diversity.
 * 6) Kondratyeva, A., Knapp, S., Durka, W., Kühn, I., Vallet, J., Machon, N., Martin, G., Motard, E., Grandcolas, P., & Pavoine, S. (2020, March 4). Urbanization effects on biodiversity revealed by a two-scale analysis of species functional uniqueness vs. redundancy. Frontiers. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2020.00073/full

Organization and Writing Quality:
The article is well written, it is very informative, however, it is not very easy to read. The article does not have any grammatical or spelling errors. The article is well-organized as each heading leads you a new section related to the main topic.

Image and Media:
The article does include three images that enhance an understanding of what urban wildlife looks like. The images are well-captioned; and they adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. The images are spaced out in a visually appealing way, however, more images can be added. All the images are presented at the beginning of the article. Images should and can be included throughout the article.

Talk Page Discussion:
The conversations happening on the Talk Page regards to edits of added information and more. There are some people that are asking if some of the information should be changed or headings should be altered but have not made any changes yet. The article is rated as a class C and has room for improvement. It does not seem to be part of any WikiProjects. The topic discussed in the article goes more in depth regarding wildlife and urban environments. The article also talks about urban wildlife throughout the world as well.

Overall Impressions
The article is an overall good article; the article is very informative. Even though it is informative, it still needs more information for certain sub topics. Some of the sub-topics are underdeveloped compared to others. More images can also be included as well.

~



Option 3

 * Article title
 * Abiotic component


 * Article Evaluation

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The article has been chosen to be evaluated because it is an S class article. This means the article is in the beginning stages of it being created. There are many ways others can contribute to the content of the article. The article has a completeness score of 37 and there are 245 views per day. There are only 9 sources listed under the reference section and more sources can contribute to the content of the article.

Lead Section:
The lead includes an introductory sentence that defines what abiotic means and the main topic of the article. The article focuses on how abiotic factors affect living organisms. The lead does touch upon the two major sections, which are the factors that contribute and examples. The lead does not include information that should not be there, and it is concise.

Content:
The article's content is relevant to the topic as it only discusses abiotic factors and examples. The content needs to be updates as not much information is present and the information that is present are from sources that date back to 2005 to 2017. There is defintily content missing as the article discusses abiotic factors and examples, however, it does not inform readers about how living organisms and ecosystems are affected. There is a huge chunk of the article missing. The article does not mention populations or topics that should be included.

Tone and Balance:
The article brings a neutral tone that is not biased. There are no viewpoints that are overrepresented; there is content that is underdeveloped. The article does not persuade readers; the article informs readers.

Sources and References:
The article is backed up with reliable secondary sources of information and the sources do reflect the available literature on the topic. The sources are not current. There are nine sources present with majority of them dating back to 2005 and some to 2017. The sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors, however, they do not include historically marginalized individuals. These historical individuals could have been mentioned in the other sources. The links for the sources do work. Due to the lack of information, there are other sources that can and should be included.

 Sources that can be added: 


 * 1) Lenski, R. E. (n.d.). What is adaptation by natural selection? perspectives of an experimental microbiologist. PLOS Genetics. https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1006668
 * 2) Miles, L. S., Breitbart, S. T., Wagner, H. H., & Johnson, M. T. J. (2019, July 31). Urbanization shapes the ecology and evolution of plant-arthropod herbivore interactions. Frontiers. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2019.00310/full#:~:text=Abiotic%20changes%20in%20the%20urban%20environment%2C%20such%20as,in%20changes%20to%20physiology%2C%20behavior%2C%20and%20population%20abundance.
 * 3) Schwarz, K., Herrmann, D. L., & McHale, M. R. (1970, January 1). Abiotic drivers of ecological structure and function in urban systems. SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4899-7500-3_4

Organization and Writing Quality:
The article is well-written, however, more information is needed. The article is easy to read. The article does not have any grammatical or spelling errors. The article is well-organized; there are three sections.

Image and Media:
The article does not include any images that enhance the understanding of the topic. The article needs images to make the article visually appealing.

Talk Page Discussion:
The conversations of the Talk Page regard to making the article more informative and including sections. The article is a new article and I do not believe it is part of a WikiProject. The WikiPedia discusses the topic not so thoroughly. In class, we would probably talk about it more in depth.

Overall Impressions
The article is an S class article that needs more information. The article needs more content, resources, and images. The article is not well developed and has a completeness of 37.

~