User:Ceceliapeine17/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: Dendrite
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it relates to Neuroanatomy, and is an essential basis for understanding how processes in Neuroanatomy work.

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 somewhat
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * overly detailed

Lead evaluation
I thought the lead for this page was over detailed and a lot of the information presented in the lead was not mentioned again in the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


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

Content evaluation
The content for this article was relevant to the topic and contained useful information, but lots of extra information that is not necessarily needed.

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 over represented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of this article was neutral and the sub-topics were balanced, but the lead was very long.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No, one citation needed
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Most all of the facts were backed up by reliable sources and the links to the sources worked. The sources that were cited were thorough and related to the topic.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Not completely, lots of unnecessary information
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Mostly, but more subtopics needed that directly relate back to the main topic

Organization evaluation
The article is a little difficult to read and the lead section is very long. If the lead was broken down into sections and more concise the article would be easier to read.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Images and media evaluation
The images added to the explanation of a dendrite on a neuron.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Things to add to the article, things that need clarifying, and things that need to be cited.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any Wiki Projects?
 * level 5-vital in Biology
 * It is a part of 4 Wiki Projects: Molecular and Cellular Biology, Neuroscience, Anatomy, and Physiology.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The Wikipedia article has gone into greater detail than what we have talked about in class. The article talks about different types of dendrites, different processes and neurotransmitter of neurons, how dendrites develop, and their history.

Talk page evaluation
The content being presented on the talk page is relevant and useful to better the article, but more conversation is needed.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Class -C
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The content of the sub-topics are relevant to the subtopics, but not really necessary for the overall topic.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article could be more concise and more content needed for the main topic focus.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is well developed, but the subtopics need to be related back to the lead. The lead needs to be more concise and sub-topics for this article need to be added that are more relevant to the main topic.

Overall evaluation
Overall the article contained useful information, but still needs work to take out unnecessary information and make the article concise and easy to read.

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: