User:Datotter007/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
International parrot trade

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.)

The reason I choose this article is because exotic pet trade has always been something that I have felt very strongly about. I feel that these beautiful species do not belong in the homes of humans, they are to be out roaming their natural habitats. If we keep up the exotic pet trade then the numbers of these animals involved will only keep decreasing. Eventually leading to use not being able to see them about. My preliminary impression was that they have a lot of references cited in their reference page, and there's sources cited throughout the entirety of the article. Something that could be improved is the dates could be updated. More research is being done all the time something I would look into is seeing if some new numbers came out on the topic.

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 of the article does introduce the topic well, giving a good explanation of what the topic of the article is. The lead does not give a description of what is to come in the major sections. No extra information that is not in the article is given in the lead. The lead of the article is concise, they get to the point of what the topic and move on, not saying anything about the different sections in the article. All the content in the article is relevant to the topic. However some of the data and content may be dated. Some missing content is all the information about illegal trade or even legal trade in places other than Mexico and the United States. The article I feel is neutral, they focused on giving all the facts on the data that they had in the article, and refrained from saying that one thing was more important than the other. A claim I felt was biased was not including anything about the United States illegal trade. The articles sources all feel like reliable secondary sources. Some of the articles may be a little bit out of date, but there is also a good amount that are more current than the others. Better articles are out there, peer-reviewed articles international websites, or scholar articles. No grammatic errors within the article, the article flowed well and did not jump back and forth. There is a graph within the article that lacks a caption for it, the image is easy to look at, to to busy of a graph but do not know what it is portraying. The article apart of Wikiproject Birds. Overall the article is on the right track but It could use some work. The strengths of the article are that they have a lot of good data on the subject. I would improve this article by including information about more countries, the overall process of the illegal trade from country to country. For completeness I would put this article in the category that is slightly above poor development.