User:BrittanyMU/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.


 * Neuroscience: (Neuroscience)
 * I chose to evaluate this article because neuroscience is something that fascinates me. I wanted to get a brief introduction to what I might be further learning in my cellular neurobiology class this semester.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes. The lead gives concise information about the broad topics it will cover.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes. There is a contents section with links to guide the reader to different sections of the article
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No. The lead only talks about information that is then covered in greater detail in the article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise with its information. Not too wordy to scare readers away but just enough information to grab the readers attention and explain broadly what the article is going to go more in depth in.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. It gives a history about neuroscience then follows it with current day neuroscience topics. It also covers neuroscience branches and organizations to really cover the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * For the most part yes. They included noble prize winners from 2017 which is pretty up-to-date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No. It is all relevant and useful information

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes. The article isn't to biased about anything. It gives many major branches of modern neuroscience education to give the reader a full understanding of what can be done with neuroscience
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No. The writer was very education and knowledgeable about neuroscience and gave all points of view.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No. An there was an even distribution of viewpoints for each topic.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No. The writer does a good job of displaying all positions equally and without bias

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * A lot were backed up by Wikipedia but there were also a fair amount of secondary sources provided
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are thorough in giving lots of information.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes. Most of the sources were up to date and had current postings or edits on them
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, but one thing I did notice was the links the writer provided most linked back to Wikipedia. Not too many secondary sources were linked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes. The article was written to have lots of useful information in it but still easy to read for people who aren't science majors
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes. The flow was very easy to follow

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes. The images helped to clear up confusion on certain topics like the human nervous system.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes. The reader can easily tell what the picture is from the caption
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There is a debate about origins and definition of neuroscience going on behind the scenes.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is B-class rated. It is part of the WikiProject Neuroscience, WikiProject Biology, WikiProject Philosophy, WikiProject Science, and WikiProject Education
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It goes very in depth and on lots of tangents since there is not time limit whereas in class we have 50 minutes to go over a topic

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is rated as B-class and seemed to have lots of good education purpose and facts for those interested in neurobiology
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * A strength would be the way the writer can take a complex subject and be able to portray it to any type of reader
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I feel as though more pictures could have been incorporated
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * This article seems very well 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: