User:ConstantCuriosity/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Springer (killer whale)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I used the Academic Disciplines link and went through the different categories within biology until I reached one that I was interested in

Evaluate the article
The article has a good lead section with an introductory sentence that describes the topic well and provides a good overview of subsequent sections. I think the lead section could potentially be less detailed and some of the information belongs in the major sections rather than a concise overview. The content seems to all be relevant to the topic and up to date, with updates on her wild born calves as recent as last year. Information is neutral and both sides of the public debate are presented. One issue is that there are many places where citations are needed but have yet to be added, in addition to many of the cited sources being from news coverage (although I think for this topic news coverage should be an acceptable source). There are a couple of grammatical errors and some awkward sentences, but nothing that alters the meaning behind the sentence. I would say that images are used well, although I'm not sure if they adhere to copyright regulations because I don't really understand how they're credited. Overall, the article is rated as B-class (but not using the actual criteria for the status) and to me it seems well developed. There are areas where I think that things could be condensed further and, as I already stated, there needs to be more citations for the information that's there.