User:Ancicco/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Janet Kelso

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article is part of the WikiProject for the cell biology class belong to so it was easy to find and I knew the information would be relevant to me. The article is about a female scientist who does research in anthropology. Anthropology is my minor so I find information about it interesting. Further, the page seems to be under developed. From skimming the article Janet Kelso seems like a very accomplished scientist and I am sure there is more information out there about her.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of the article only contains one sentence about what kind of scientist Janet Kelso is and where she works. It does not give a brief but detailed overview of the article or describe the sections to follow in the article. The lead doesn't contain any information that is not present in the main article though which is good.

The content seems sparse. It really only details two aspects of her life lumped into one section. The information in the research and career section seems slightly unorganized and I feel as if some of it could be separated into two or more sections. I also feel the article would benefit from the addition of a section for a few of her notable publications and papers which could help readers better understand the types of research she does and why she is important.

Some of the wording doesn't seem objective, namely the sentence that states her "natural scientific curiosity pondered the long term effects." This language isn't objective and almost reads as if it is copied directly from somewhere. The article reads very choppily and does not flow well. It could benefit from restructuring and rewording of most of the content.

As sparse as the content is, there is an overabundance of sources. These sources while, Im sure are important, seems to be put after just about every sentence no matter how little information that sentence contains. I'm sure a closer read of many of these sources would provide much more information about Janet Kelso that would benefit the article by providing more content and by helping show the relevance of these numerous sources.

The article definitely contains some important information about an important female scientist and in my opinion, seems to be notable enough to belong on Wikipedia. However, the article is lacking content and is poorly organized and written. The article could benefit from more research, more content, and rewriting and rewording of most of the information.