User:Barsoumd/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Deathstalker

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it was very interesting and applicable to the course in which I am enrolled. It matters because this article is obviously lacking any depth of knowledge so I wanted to evaluate it.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: This section has a good introductory sentence. It doesn't comprehensively include the material of the article well. This section seems to only focus on the naming of the insect, and does not seem to include any other information on the insect. This section would need to be revised and include introductions of the other information that is in the article.

Content: The content of this article is sufficient, but it is obvious that more needs to be added. Further research will need to be done to add to this article and make up for missing information. However, the information that is provided Is sufficient. The content is up-to-date and that is shown through an analysis of the references.

Tone and Balance: The original author of this article maintains an unbiased view of The topic. In the material that was provided, the author maintained an unbiased and neutral view.

Sources and References: The resources and references that are included in this article are all current and contain information that is related to the original topic. The sources do include a wide range of authors, but none of them are historically significant.

Organization and Writing Quality: The material that is provided on this topic is clear, concise, and easy to read. However, it does contain a few grammatical errors, but they can be easily revised. The material within the sub topics are relevant and clear. There needs to be further addition of sub topics, as I do not believe it is updated and comprehensive.

Images and Media: The images that are included in this article are sufficient to show the main topic, but more comprehensive media would need to be added. There are a lot of sub topics that are not represented by photos. However, the captions do contain some grammatical errors, but it can easily be fixed.

Talk Page Discussion: The conversations that are occurring in the talk page are trying to provide further evidence on current topics. They do not seem to be branching out into additional information as much as trying to revise the current information.

Overall Impressions: Overall, the article contains enough basic information to explain the primary topic, but a large amount of further information could be added to the revision and further research. In the subcategories that the article contained, Sufficient information was provided. Further editors of this article could branch out into other aspects that could be related to this primary topic. Further research could include information on: The medical side of venom, further research on the stinger, etc.