User:Cayleyp399/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: (Yellow-billed magpie)
 * I chose this article because this bird is native to my hometown of Sacramento and I am interested in learning more about it.

Lead


 * Guiding questions

The lead includes basic information about the yellow-billed magpie in order to introduce the topic. It includes information that is not found in the rest of the article such as where the name originated from. The lead is concise and the topic sentence clearly describes the topic.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content includes relevant information about the bird, including its taxonomy and relation to other species, as well as its behavior, diseases it is susceptible to, and its status as a threatened species. The content appears to be up to date, although I would add that although it is near threatened, its populations are increasing as of recent years.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is neutral and includes basic information about the bird without favoring one perspective over another. The article mentions that loss of habitat and rat poison have contributed to its status as near threatened, so one could take that information and make an argument against humans destroying habitat and improperly disposing of rat poison, but the article itself does not make an argument.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The facts in the article are backed up by secondary sources. Some of the sources are from the early 2000s so they may not be entirely up-to-date on the facts about yellow billed magpies. However, the sources are mainly studies or accounts of the species from reputable organizations such as Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology and the Nature Conservancy. I clicked on several links and they worked.


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

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well-written and concise. There are a couple instances in which it could expand on a topic it brings up, such as the funeral-like behavior that the bird engages in, and why it is susceptible to the West Nile virus. It does not have spelling errors and is well-organized.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The images show a close up picture of a yellow billed magpie and a picture of a yellow billed magpie next to a deer. They enhance understanding of the topic by showing what the bird looks like as well as an example of a food source for it. The images are well-captioned, adhere to the copyright regulations, and are visually appealing. At least one more image could be used to show the dome-shaped nest that is described in the Breeding section of the article.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

One editor asked if anyone objects to removing the commentary about the Korean magpie and another editor responded and was quite adamant about keeping that information. Another editor was concerned that the article did not include information about animated magpie television stars, and also thought that it should be included that magpies can recognize themselves in a mirror. The article is part of WikiProject Birds, which is attempting to create a standardized ornithological resource. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The status is start-class, meaning it is an incomplete but developing article. It is considered of low-importance to the ornithology project. The article's strengths are that it includes very basic information on many aspects of yellow billed magpie behavior, taxonomy, diseases, and conservation. It could be improved by expanding on some of the topics it mentions such as their funeral-like behavior and their susceptibility to West Nile. The article is a bit underdeveloped and could definitely use more explanations.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly 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: