User:Caitlin.Hong/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: Sexual differentiation in humans
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Sex differentiation is a topic we discussed in class. It is one of the concepts that is taught early in a genetics course since it can be related to more complex topics such as chromosomes. Additionally, learning about sex differentiation in humans allows students to compare sex differentiation in other species. As genetics students, it is important to be able to understand the concept of how genes work, and in this case, how they can help determine biological sex.

Lead

 * 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? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes. The article was last updated May 25, 2020.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? All of the content in the article is relevant and belongs.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
 * 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? There are some older sources, the oldest being from 1970. I believe there might be some more current articles that deal with the same topic.
 * 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? Yes.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? None that I found.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? A few.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes. All 3 images are from the public domain.
 * 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 have been some conversations about a merge with other possibly related articles. Other users have opposed these proposals and have discussed what they think would be best.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is a part of the WikiProjects, Genetics, Anatomy, and Physiology. It is rated C-Class.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Wikipedia discusses this topic similarly to the way we discussed in class beginning with the SRY gene and how it leads to male phenotypes. Additionally, the article discusses intersex individuals and how those phenotypes can occur. However, this article discusses the development of external genitalia more than we did in class. However, the textbook does mention this.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I am not sure where to find this information. Since it has been updated recently, I would say that it has san active status, if that's what the question is asking.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article does a good job of explaining complex concepts. It is well organized and divided into related sections with accompanying information.
 * How can the article be improved? The article can be improved by adding more information into the Secondary sexual characteristics section. Additionally, it may be tough since science is strongly based on terminology, but I think this article may benefit from being written in a way that a variety of audiences could read regardless of if they have prior scientific knowledge.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that this article is well-developed, but could use more information in some areas such as the Secondary sexual characteristics section.

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: