User:AnNguyen1018/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.

Option 2

 * Article title: Wushan Man
 * Does each claim have a citation?
 * Are the citations reliable?
 * Article Evaluation
 * Most of the article's content is relevant to the topic and the tone remained largely neutral throughout. The article discusses the important scientific discovery of the Wushan Man, a set of fossilised remains of an extinct, undetermined non-hominin ape in central China. This topic is not one that tackles one of Wikipedia's historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects. Most claims in the article contained citations, but a significant amount of these sources came from the scientific journal Nature, which is a British scientific journal that features peer-reviewed research about science and technology. While Nature is a reliable source for the article's content, it could benefit from expanding to find more diverse sources. Some of the writing in the article appeared to be quite unclear and hard to read due to errors in grammar and confusing sentence structures.
 * The article is not quite well-organized since the sections of content do not reflect the major points of the topic well. For example, there is a large section dedicated to the retraction of information reported by paleoanthropologist Russell Ciochon. While this is important and interest information, the article would be more focused on concised if this section could be summarized better and irrelevant could be cut out. This section appears quite out of place since readers would be reading the article to find factual information on the Wushan Man, and a large section on the false claims that were made about the topic could be distracting and confusing. The language used in some parts of the article could also be more formal and professional. Some information were also irrelevant. Overall, the article is neutral, informative, but slightly underdeveloped and unorganized. Some improvements to be made could include more professional writing, more revelant and concise information and organization, and more diverse sources.
 * Sources
 * The article is not quite well-organized since the sections of content do not reflect the major points of the topic well. For example, there is a large section dedicated to the retraction of information reported by paleoanthropologist Russell Ciochon. While this is important and interest information, the article would be more focused on concised if this section could be summarized better and irrelevant could be cut out. This section appears quite out of place since readers would be reading the article to find factual information on the Wushan Man, and a large section on the false claims that were made about the topic could be distracting and confusing. The language used in some parts of the article could also be more formal and professional. Some information were also irrelevant. Overall, the article is neutral, informative, but slightly underdeveloped and unorganized. Some improvements to be made could include more professional writing, more revelant and concise information and organization, and more diverse sources.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources


 * 1) POPE, G.G., 1983.Evidence on the age of the Asian Hominidae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 80:4988–4992.
 * 2) WANG Q., 1996.Assignment of Longgupo Cave hominid incisor from Wushan. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 15:320–323.

Option 2


 * Article title: Brain Size
 * Article Evaluation
 * The article's content is relevant and written in a neutral tone and point of view. The article discusses brain size, which is a topic that is widely studied within various scientific fields. This topic is not one that tackles one of Wikipedia's equity gaps. Many claims in the article do not contain citations, which could make them appear unreliable. In the "Humans" section of the article, there is the claim "It is also important to note that variation between individuals is not as important as variation within species, as overall the differences are much smaller," which seems like an opinion more than a factually supported claim. Some parts of the article appears out of place or lacking information. For example, the article contains 4 subsections under the topic "Variation and evolution," all of which only have 1-3 sentences of information. This gives the impression that there was not enough information on the topic for it to stand alone as a subtopic. In addition, while most of the citations are reliable, a significant portion of them come from primary sources. Overall, the article is neutral, informative, and well-written, but slightly underdeveloped. It could benefit from a better organization of information, more citations where necessary, and more varied sources.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources


 * 1) Blinkov, S.M. and Glezer, I.I. The Human Brain in Figures and Tables. A Quantitative Handbook, New York: Plenum Press, 1968.
 * 2) Rehkamper, G., Frahm, H.D. and Zilles, K. Quantitative development of brain and brain structures in birds (Galliformes and Passeriforms) compared to that in mammals (Insectivores and Primates). Brain Beh. Evol., 37:125-143, 1991.