User:Cdean2017/sandbox

Article Evaluation
I chose Polyspermy as my article.

Evaluating Content

- Every subtitle and the details within every subtitle seemed relevant to the topic.

- Some of the subtitles had long names, and there could have been more images.

- I would add more images.

Evaluating Tone

- Yes, the article is neutral and has no bias.

- No, there are no viewpoints that seem under- or over-represented.

Evaluating Sources

- Yes, the links in this article work and they support the claims in the article.

- They are neutral sources, and they show data and information from research and statistics.

Checking the Talk Page

- The conversations are valid. There is a debate on the way one chapter should have been written and discussions on the need to add more images and diagrams to better explain the difference between fast-block and slow-block.

- The article is rated start-class and low-importance. It is a part of WikiProject Biology.

- I feel like we have not really covered this term in depth quite yet, but it was in the list so I used it.

Article Selection
I chose Evolution of Ageing because there is a lot of work that needs done on the page. There are issues with citations, length, person reflection and assessment, and inappropriate wording. I figured this would be an article that could genuinely benefit from my editing just from rewording, generalizing, and citing information.