User:CNArmstrong/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: Sinlge Nucleotide Polymorphism
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * This is a C class article in my field of interest that I feel I can contribute to.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, there is a strong definition for the concept.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It vaguely references it, but the sections are not clearly defined outside of the table of contents.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Other than references to similar topics, no.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is fair but feels slightly repetitive and not generalized.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, with some extraneous info.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is some information that feels unnecessary for a wikipedia page.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * None.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * None.
 * 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?
 * Mostly
 * 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?
 * The article is a bit wordy and repetitive.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not notice any major spelling or grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article's organization is good but I feel could be better.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Not really, only 2.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * No.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * As I far as I am aware.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Due to the lack of images, it's difficult to say.

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 an equal amount of relevant discussions and irrelevant discussion to the topic. A lot on clarification of facts and definitions.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C. Yes, this semester and last year.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia explains the topic in a way anyone could understand and recognize, whereas in class the students are expected to understand high level vocabulary.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Wordy and unconcise.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Good amount of information.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Streamlining the information and present it in a more easily digestible way.
 * 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:

~