User:Bamcclure18/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 1

 * Article title
 * Beekeeping

The Lead includes a description of the article’s topic, but it includes additional relevant facts about beekeeping in somewhat of a random list that does not correspond to the sections of the article. Some of the information listed in the lead is returned to in the body of the article but several pieces of the information are beekeeping terms or vocabulary and their definitions. These specifics make the lead overly detailed and does not give the reader an indication of the subtopics that will be addressed in the article.

The articles content is relevant to the topic and as it includes a reference to colony collapse disorder is somewhat up to date. Updates regarding more recent research on the causes of CCD could be included to improve the article. The short section on traditional beekeeping would be better fit within the historical section. The traditional section could then be changed to cover the traditional or norms of modern beekeeping. The urban, indoor and natural beekeeping sections could then be grouped together under a more appropriate section title  - trends/fads/movements. All of the content in the article "belongs" it is just not organized well.

Within the current information in the article there are no heavy biases to a particular position. In reviewing some of the Talk page there  was care in including the flow hive as it has been controversial. Also, a section on breeding that is no longer part of the article so possibly the general consensus was that there was an attempt to over represent the idea of breeding and eventually the topic was removed or placed in a different article. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in one way or another about beekeeping in general or the tools and practices within beekeeping.

All of the facts in the article are not backed by secondary sources. Many of the facts are cited with current reputable sources that are reflective of available information on beekeeping. Links work - although not all of them were checked.

All of the facts in the article are not backed by secondary sources. Many of the facts are cited with current reputable sources that are reflective of available information on beekeeping. Links work - although not all of them were checked. There is a great deal of information that could be updated. It is underdeveloped and poorly developed missing much info and a lack of organization.

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources