User:AlexWeinrich/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Animal studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because I am very interested in animal studies, and it stood out to me in the list. I have heard of many different opinions on animal studies, and I wanted to learn more about this topic. I have previously heard stories regarded to the animal liberation movement, and it was interesting to learn how each culture handles this differently. I believed this article would be different than it was, explaining more, but it was still very interesting! Animal studies are very important, and the relationship between animals and humans is also very important. Humans are beginning to realize this more, and animal studies are slowly becoming more humane.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The lead of this article was very powerful and gave a short, very concise introduction to the rest of the article. It does not go into detail, and provide a brief overview. The sentence following the lead provides more detail and continues to transition into facts/statistics. The content of this article was also very concise; it provided a few facts of how animal studies has changed through history, but it did not go into great detail. The article began with focusing on how different theories relate to animal studies. It then only describes history of animal studies, and research topics and methodologies. After reading the lead sentence, I thought this article would stay more focused on what animal studies are, and how they have adapted and changed throughout history. The body of the article needed more detail, as it was almost too concise. Animal studies is a huge field with many different topics, and I was surprised to only read two topics on it. This article did seem up to date; the last edit was in 2020, and all information seemed relevant and up to date. The content of this page does relate to an underrepresented population, the animals. This article partially focused on the relationship between animals and humans, and how humans need to re-evaluate the relationship with animals for animal studies. The tone and balance of this article is slightly biased. Near the end of the article, there is a statement about how humans need to re-evaluate animal studies and how we treat the animals. This article did not give much on the opposing side, how animals have helped humans immensely throughout inhumane studies. However, this was not extremely bias, as it related to how animal studies have changed. There were many sources throughout this article; many facts had credible references. However, the sources are not currently up to date. The most recent source was published in 2012, but there are sources dating back to 1963. Although old articles are necessary with this topic and the history, but there are no current sources. Most of this article was very organized and put into sections even though there weren't many sections on the topic. There were no images published in this article. There is little talk on this article. There is only one conversation stating that animality studies should be more included throughout this article, or as another sub-section. After evaluating and reading through the article, I did not have a great impression. It was not very compelling or interesting; it gave the bare minimum on the topic and I wish there was more information published. By adding more details and topics, this article could become a lot stronger. However, there were few strong points. The author kept the article very concise and easy to read and follow. If this article was more developed, it would have been more interesting, and informing.