User:Aerindeleon3/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Māori science

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am personally interested in the field of science where it intersects with different ways of knowing, namely indigenous knowledge, and how it affects and interacts with "Traditional" western science rigor.

Evaluate the article
The Lead section is concise, and is descriptive of the topic. Despite how short the article is, the lead section still introduces all the major sections. It does however mention there being a difference between "Maori Science" and "Western Science", but there is no section that describes the difference between the two.

The Content is relevant, and goes into detail what was mentioned in the Lead section. It is missing the description of differences with "Western Science", a section was not dedicated to the findings that Maori Science has made.

The Tone overall was neutral, however the section regarding the effects of colonization, it begins to lean negatively towards the effects of colonization and over positive language towards the women of science section. The article as a whole does not give a sense of trying to persuade the reader of any particular stance.

The Sources seem to be a mix of academic articles and informal resources. Links seem to work still.

The organization of the article leaves much to be desired. While the sections are introduced in the Lead, the first section immediately introduces prominent women in the field before having a section going into depth of what Maori science is, its origins, and the impacts it has/experienced. There is not grammar or spelling errors, but the writing feels amateur-esque.

Not extra media.

The talk page is small, with most of the discussion looking to expand certain ideas (e.g. Maori Science vs. Western, the origin of the disciple, editing towards a more neutral tone, and a current practices).

The article is okay, it leaves much to be desired, and feels both incomplete and unpolished. The Lead section is strong and introduces many interesting ideas of the discipline, but fails to expand towards the rest of the article. Further additions and edits towards a more neutral tone overall would improve and develop the page.