User:Bucear/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: Nutritional Genomics
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * My Bachelor's degree is in Human Nutrition and I have a genuine interest in the role of genetics in nutritional disorders and treatment.


 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, its pretty general to the topic and doesn't include everything discussed so far in the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise and frankly very short. It could add more detail and information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, all references are between 2010-2015.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There are many things missing like the fact that this article only minimally explains the relationship between obesity and nutritional genomics. It also briefly mentions Prader-Willi's syndrome with not much detail. There are many categories to include in this article that deal with culture, populations, eating disorders, genetic food tolerances, etc.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Not really, it is mentioned that obesity is one of the most studied topics of nutritional genomics which kind of sounds a little biased
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The whole article seems underrepresented and needs more information.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


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

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Mostly
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I noticed a couple
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Not completely, the article has 2 sections, Background and Applications. Background is brief and spends more time talking about a syndrome than the history of nutritional genomics. Applications talks solely about obesity. Maybe a different section header would be fitting.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * NA
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * NA
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * NA

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Just the need for more information.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Low importance. No, it's not part of any projects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't discussed this topic in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Unfinished.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It exists.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Addition of more information on the topic.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped.

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: