User:Chaigood/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: Environmental sex determination
 * I have chosen this article to evaluate because it relates to my topic, sequential hermaphroditism.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * No, it is very "wordy" and not very clear on what environmental sex determination actually is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, the lead does not include the articles major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the Lead does include all relevant information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It's a little bit over detailed, if you weren't studying the topic you would be confused.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, all the content is relevant.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes, there are a lot of holes in the content. The Lead is missing a lot of general information, while the following section only includes a few specific examples.

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, there is a strong references section.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * The most recent source is 2006, meaning that there could be improvement by adding more current sources.
 * 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?
 * There needs to improvement, the article could be more clear.
 * 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?
 * No, there needs to be a revision of how the topics are broken down, and adding more headings that relate to environmental sex determination.

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

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Someone expressed that they "cleaned" up the article, however someone who knew more about the topic should step in.
 * 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?
 * In class, we have gone into more depth examining the different aspects of sex determination. This article has little information.
 * In class, we have gone into more depth examining the different aspects of sex determination. This article has little information.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I would say around a C-.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It has promising base information and images.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * It can be more clear, and add more subsections.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped

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: