User:Cmlambert/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Gentamicin

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Gentamicin is the antibiotic my laboratory uses in mammalian cell culture to prevent infection because I'm allergic to Penicillin and the biosynthesis of Gentamicin is not documented in Wikipedia

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead section: There is at least 1 sentence about each topic covered throughout the Wiki

 * 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? At least 1 sentence per topic
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.) '''Conflicting information is in the lead, The lead claims Gentamicin is not used for treating Chlamydia or Gonorrhea
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise given the amount of material

Content
A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.


 * 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? Missing detailed biosynthesis of Gentamicin
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? This information is not relevant to the topic

Tone and Balance
Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.


 * Is the article from a neutral point of view? 'Yes, very well actually
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? Not applicable
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? As far as a diverse spectrum of authors, yes but including historically marginalized individuals doesn't seem applicable
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) Possibly, but the sources seem pretty legitimate
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?Yes, very much so
 * 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? Yes

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No, but also not applicable
 * 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

Talk page discussion
The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?Mainly clarifications on conflicting information
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Class C, is a part of 2 WikiProjects: WikiProject Pharmacology and WikiProject Medicine as well as WikiEducation Foundation project
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There are not glaring differences

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status? Class C, High and Low importance
 * What are the article's strengths? The concise content and multiple resources from various sources
 * How can the article be improved? Information about the biosynthesis of Gentamicin
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Well-developed