User:CoolEditorPerson/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Urban evolution

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

This article is about how populations evolve in urban settings and the factors unique to these settings that effect the evolutionary process. I chose this article because it is part of the evolutionary biology WikiProject, a topic that I am very interested in, and because it is within the scope of the ecology WikiProject, the topic of the class that I am completing assignments for. This topic is important because it provides information about a scientific topic that is very relevant to the lives of humans and discusses certain ways that humans affect our environment.

My preliminary impression is that this article is good quality, but a little short. It has a lead section and multiple headers, as well as a long list of references that all appear to be scientific.

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.)

The lead section clearly defines the topic and is concise. It mostly follows the structure of the article. I recommend that the lead section be revised to more closely follow the structure of the article, however. It is informative but vague and difficult to understand.

The content of the article is very relevant and appears to be up-to-date. There are some old sources, including some from 1999 and the early 2000, but there are also many sources that were published within the last few years. Every source is from a scientific journal. The majority of sentences/paragraphs are cited.

The article sounds neutral. The writing is mostly formal, although certain sentences could be revised. For example, the content under the "Urban habitat fragmentation" subheading includes the following sentence: "This is why probably some species aren’t able to sustain themselves in the fragmented environments of urban areas." Although the sentence is cited, words like "probably" are vague and informal.

The article has no images. Its talk page is very sparse, with no discussions between editors. The article appears to have been mainly written by two editors each working on a course assignment. It is part of the Evolutionary Biology WikiProject but has no rating.

Overall, the article is of good quality. The content is relevant and informative, sources are cited, and there are multiple sections. The formality could be improved and more content should be added to further develop the article. The lead section should be revised upon addition of more content.