User:Bailey.goley/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Biologists
 * I am currently studying Biology and work with several biologists a day.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The article leads clearly from the introductory sentence into the articles topic on the profession of a biologist. There is a brief description of each of the article's major sections is included. Some important biological fields are mentioned within the introduction and are later fully elaborated within the article. The lead has appropriate information but may be slightly over detailed.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article's content stays relevant and concise to the topic presented. Content could be updated with "Honors and Awards" and "Research" with the most recent research and awards given.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article remains neutral in tone and there is no bias. No persuasion or over/unerrepresentation is presented.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The article is backed by several current reliable and credible sources. There are a lot of useful and working links within the article.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

Article is well written with organization and no grammatical/spelling errors.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

Images are reflecting article topic and captioned well. Could use a larger variety of pictures rather than portraits of biologists.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There has not been much documentation of edits since 2013, but the article has been clearly edited since 2017. There is a conversation for every article topic and an interesting debate about Aristotle's relation to the biological sciences. This article started as a biology WikiProject and is rated class-C.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article is well written and includes basic information needed to understand the concept. Article can be improved by adding more interesting subtopics. This is a well-developed article with room for improvement.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: Talk:Biologist