User:Culbert3002/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Sea star wasting disease

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.)

I chose this article because it is relevant to the topics discussed in previous classes. That also means I have some prior knowledge going into this evaluation. The article matters because it is the cause of the sunflower sea star being registered as an endangered species. It is also important because of the multiple repercussions from a declining sea star population. Knowledge of the disease allows for a deeper understanding of the complexities of the situation

Evaluate the article
The first sentence in the article is straight to the point and effectively communicated the basic premise of the topic. The introductory paragraph does not contain the main topics of the article but there is a table of contents directly below it that has links to all of the major sections and topics. It also does not contain anything that is not a focus of the article. Overall, the lead is very concise and is not overly detailed.

All major paragraphs are related and important to the disease; including: past and current plagues, symptoms, treatment, locations, etc. It is relevant due to the fact that it discusses the plague that is happening currently. All major content for the disease is covered and there is nothing written that is not relevant to the topic. There is mention of past plagues which could be something that is often overlooked. Meaning, the article gives light to a part of the topic that is not widely known about.

In the article, there is no use of I, we, us, or me giving it a neutral position. Furthermore, all information relayed is based in facts so there is no emphasis biasing certain points. The current plague has more information than other plagues but that can be attributed to the fact that it is more of an issue today. What I mean by this is there is more of a reason to understand the factors of this disease because of the climate crisis and how it may affect not just sea stars, but all ocean life. There is also the introduction of more sophisticated technology allowing for better analysis of the current plague. There is no mention of minority opinions on any of the contents in the article. There is also no attempt to change the reader's opinion on any topic.

Most, if not all, claims made in the article are followed by a link to the source the first time they are mentioned. All sources linked are from a wide range of current authors that thoroughly cover the topic. Most sources are from scientific literature that have been published and reviewed so there is not much better than that. All links work.

The organization of the article is good and each section contains paragraphs of what it says it does. There is good, effective writing. There minimal if not any grammar or spelling errors. It is also split well into each section containing the different content.

Any pictures are well placed and captioned and are linked to the source. All photos are in line with the copyright regulations.

As for the talk page, there are no discussions but there are some people questioning the quality of some parts of the article and if more should be added. There is also someone questioning the time neutrality of a certain paragraph. Since then, it has been fixed. It is related to a few wiki projects of c-class low/mid important. The article is different from what we've talked about in class because of the mention of the past plagues.

I would say the overall status of the article is good for such a specialized topic. It carries enough information to provide a reader with an understanding of the disease as well as its history and current situation. More information would always help but I think there is also a need for more pictures. Overall, the article is well covered given the information that we have while also considering the fact that it is not as widely recognized as other issues and topics.