User:CrispRadish922/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioacoustics

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
It's an interesting topic, and acoustics are the main sense for many animals. On its own, this page seems very broad, especially in contrast with related articles like the one on hearing range. The hearing range page goes a lot further into its specific examples, whereas the bioacoustics page has a few sentences at most per example.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is clear and concise. Its material is mostly reflected in the article, though it does not explore it in depth. The main piece that the article is missing is describing sound reception methods of animals, which is mentioned in the lead section. There is a short section which does not really describe the topic of sound reception/detection, and it does not link any articles for further reading on them. The content is very vague at times, and some stretches lack sources (Acoustic signals and Sound production, detection, and use in animals, for example). Many of the sources are not recent - half of the sources are more than 10 years old. The writing quality is fine, though a bit dense or vague at times. The media in the page has mixed usefulness: the spectrograms and image of hydrophone are helpful, but the images of birds making noises are not particularly helpful. Audio clips may be better for an article such as this. The talk page has not had any meaningful discussion since 2008. Overall, I think this article could use a bit of work across the board, but mainly in terms of content.