User:Anaimzade/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Juxtacrine signalling

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.)

The article is relevant to my class material. It matters because it is one of the most important process that guides cell-to-cell interaction. The article was relatively short, therefore, I believe that it could be revised and filled with more information.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The answer to most of the questions is yes. However, it seems that it could be rewritten. There is an inclusion of some other types of cell signaling that are good to mention, but are not relevant really relevant to the signaling at the hand. It seems that the information should be more focused and some vague terms defined.

Content: The content is relatively old, because the latest source used if from 2018. There is likely more information discovered on this topic. Some of the content is irrelevant in certain categories as it should belong in the other.

Tone: The article's tone is neutral and the rules are followed.

Sources: All the sources seem to be secondary sources. There are all credible and able to be accessed. The sources are not very current, since the latest was 2018. This could be worked on, but does not seem like a huge issue.

Organization and writing quality: The article seems to be too concise, although most of the information is touched on. I have not seen any grammatical errors.

Images/Media: There is only one image. It is fine, but it does not show everything that was talked about. It would be clever to add animations of the interaction and signaling.

Talk Page Discussion: Most of the people mention that the some terms were not identified, along with some information that does not fully encompass the idea of signaling. It does not mention how it relates to other topics that are found in "See Also" section. I believe it is part of WikiMedia and Molecular Biology Project. The material is oversimplified, but I believe it is for the best as some people might not understand a harder terminology, but some of the words that appear might not necessarily have the best explanation.

Overall impression: The status of the article is Start-Class. The article is relatively well-organized. It is mostly the content that needs to be improved. The article is underdeveloped, it definitely needs more work done on it.