User:Calcij/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: Whale fall
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. It is interesting page on a piece of science I'd like to learn more about.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it succinctly and clearly describes the events needed for a whale fall to occur
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes it mentions relevant information for each major section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No it does not include information not present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise and it only contains pertinent information.

Lead evaluation
The lead is informative and concise. It was well done and is presently clearly, with relevant facts and evidence properly cited.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes. The article's content is about whale falls, and all the content on this page is related to whale falls.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The content is update and it even contains information from the past two months
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is not any missing content (that there is information known about) and there is not any information that does not belong.

Content evaluation
The content is kept to an excellent standard. The content is all relevant and is backed by the proper citation.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No the article mostly presents statements of fact and for the areas where there are not enough areas of research, the article presents all sides and theories in a neutral way.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No there are not.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it does not. It maintains a neutral stance.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article effectively maintains a balanced and neutral approach. All information is neutral, unbiased, and upholds to Wikipedia's standards.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, everything is properly cited.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources are thorough and reflect the available literature.
 * Are the sources current? Yes. Some sources are even from the past few months.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they do.

Sources and references evaluation
All evidence is properly backed by reputable sources and references. Many of the sources are also very current and recent, reflecting that the page is current and up to date.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is clear and concise.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I did not find any grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The sections are well divided overall and are organized presentably.

Organization evaluation
The organization of the page is very effective, and all of the relevant information is divided clearly.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes it includes relevant images for many of the sections.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes. The image caption convey the images importance.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes they are.

Images and media evaluation
The page achieves a great balance of using images.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? They are a few different points about presenting data differently, as well as more technical stuff.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as a C class and is a part of the Cetaceans, Mammals, and Oceans projects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It goes further in depth about the importance and details of whale falls ecosystems. It also goes into the problems of whaling and how that has significantly affected the deep sea's biomass.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is up and running.
 * What are the article's strengths? It is organized very well and the sections were split up efficiently.
 * How can the article be improved? It could further discuss the diversity of life within a whale falls and how it compares to other ecosystems. The article does a good job giving a surface level description but it could go further in depth.
 * 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 it is very developed but it could be developed with further detail.

Overall evaluation
Overall I would rate this article as very good or as excellent. It was well organized, flows clearly, and follows Wikipedia's standards.

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: