User:Alison188/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Please note that I decided to do this project with Tyson Mukai!

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Phytotoxin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytotoxin


 * Article Evaluation
 * The lead includes a concise introductory sentence and brief introduction that describes the article’s topic. The viewpoints are neutral. However, when looking through the page and its references, we noticed some weak points. For example, we noticed that some of the content is not up to date. Around ¾ of the references were dated before the 21st century, and some of the references had permanent dead links. There were also many sources that couldn’t be easily accessed, and a few primary research articles. There also seems to be missing content when it comes to describing the applications of phytotoxins and photos. Therefore, we note that the topic can be expanded upon. When looking at the talk page, we can see that the article is rated as Stub-Class and Mid-importance. The talk page is inactive.


 * Sources
 * a.       https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b01639
 * b.       https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/phytotoxin
 * c.       https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10643389.2020.1823172?journalCode=best20

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Persian Berry - Persian berry


 * Article Evaluation
 * This Wikipedia site only has one sentence, and it can clearly be expanded upon. This sentence is relevant to the topic and is written neutrally. This page’s only citation, however, is invalid when clicked upon, and it seems to be dated as 1880. This suggests that the information is outdated and can be missing content. There are also no images in this post. Consequently, we can deduce that the article is very poorly developed. When looking at the talk page, we can see that the article is rated as Stub-Class and Low-importance. The talk page is inactive and was last used in 2013.


 * Sources
 * a.       https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12520-021-014653
 * b.       https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/1895/CT/CT8956700496
 * c.       https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/106581

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Broomrape Orobanche - Wikipedia


 * Article Evaluation
 * a.      The introductory paragraph is very short. When comparing it to the introductory lead of the Wikipedia sunflower page, we observed that the broomrape’s page did not include a brief description of the article’s major sections. That is, the introduction only described information on its scientific classification and where it grew. However, the article’s content is relevant to the topic and is written neutrally. Even so, there seems to be content that can be further elaborated on. There also seems a lack of sources that we can trace the information back to. For example, there is a citation dated as 1930. When looking at the talk page, we can see that the article is rated as Start-Class and Mid-importance. The talk page was last used in 2021.


 * Sources
 * a.       https://www.britannica.com/plant/broomrape-family
 * b.       https://www.jstor.org/stable/23598428?pq-origsite=summon&saml_data=eyJzYW1sVG9rZW4iOiI5MjIxMDE1Mi04NWZhLTRiNGQtODFmYS1kZWJhNjVkZjhhMjEiLCJpbnN0aXR1dGlvbklkcyI6WyIxMjJiMTFjOS00YWE5LTQzY2UtYWQzZS0xMmUyYTE4YmU3ZWUiXX0#metadata_info_tab_contents
 * c.       https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5091723/

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Horticulture - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Horticulture


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article’s content is relevant to the topic; however, we noticed that the intro/lead is very short, meaning the content can be expanded upon. Even so, the article is written neutrally, and each claim has a citation. These citations are reliable and are around 7 years old. However, some of the sources are from the 1950s to the 1970s. Another observation we made is that this page has an inactive talk page with not many ideas on how to expand the article. We also noticed that this page was listed as a top or high importance page within 5 WikiProjects.


 * Sources
 * a.       https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128228494000048
 * b.     https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128228494000140
 * c.     https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128132760000213

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Accessory Fruit -    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_fruit


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article’s content is relevant to the topic, but its intro/lead is very short and underdeveloped. The article is written neutrally, and each claim has a reliable citation. We observe that most of its sources are around 5 years old with some articles dating as 1977, 2006 and 2009. We also noticed that this page has an inactive talk page, is listed as a start or B class, and is listed as top or high importance within 2WikiProjects.


 * Sources
 * a.     https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225593/
 * b.     https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780323754866000084
 * c.     https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128200070000052