User:Claredailley/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: New Mexico whiptail
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: this is an all female species, like the amazon molly i am writing about

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
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? it is very detailed on the mating style and why they are an all female species, this could be in the paragraph under the behavior section or create a new section called reproduction.

Lead evaluation
Good introduction. Gives background information and a description of what will be in the article. Too detailed on reproduction for the Lead paragraphs.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? I believe so.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? no

Content evaluation
Very good information. Provides exact measurements and descriptions.

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

Tone and balance evaluation
the article is written in a very neutral tone and is not trying to convince the reader of anything. It mentions a theory at the end of the behavior section yet they are just presenting the idea and not trying to convince one of it, and they do not let their beliefs sway their writing.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


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

Sources and references evaluation
There are very few sources provided, and not all the links work. The entire description section does not cite one source.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes
 * 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? somewhat

Organization evaluation
i think there should be a whole section on reproduction. Information from the lead and the behavior sections could be combined here

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes
 * Are images well-captioned? somewhat
 * 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
There is one picture and it enhances the article. The caption gives the names of the lizards shown but does not tell you which lizard is which (for examples, should say shown from left to right)

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There are a few critiques on the information presented and a question about the species.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is part of WikiProjects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? there is not much on the talk page to compare it to. The talk page is mostly made up of corrections which is not part of our class.

Talk page evaluation
There is not much activity on the talk page yet it seems not everyone agrees with the information presented in the article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? there is room for improvement with technicalities yet overall, it is a good article.
 * What are the article's strengths? there are a lot of facts and information presented
 * How can the article be improved? better sources, and improved organization/spacing
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? slightly underdeveloped. this article only focuses on specific aspects of the new Mexico whiptail lizard

Overall evaluation
It is a good article with lots of information presented. it could provide a more inclusive view of the new Mexico whiptail lizard by discussing things like its diet, environment, and more. The sources and organization could be improved.

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: