User:Decampr/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Aye-aye
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate
 * I like Aye-ayes

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, there is a sentence that describes what the Aye-aye is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No. The introduction mainly focuses on its foraging strategy which, while interesting, is not the full composition of the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes. The introduction is the only mention of the extinct species of aye-aye (D. robusta) within the clade Daubentoniiidae. This is unfortunate because this extinct species' wiki page is only a stub and more info about D. robusta could possibly be included within the aye-aye article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * There is maybe too much info about the tap foraging in the introduction. It could focus on outlining the article more.

Lead evaluation
This lead isn't great at giving an overview of the whole article. The information is different from that in the body of the article in that it emphasizes that there is only one other species of mammal that uses tap foraging, and that the aye-aye fills a "woodpecker niche" in the environment of Madagascar. However, there is much more in the article (and to the aye-aye) than its unique tap foraging.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. The article is about the aye-aye.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Looking at the review history, there was changes made in October, however, judging by the talk page, the last discussion about adding information was several years ago, besides a sentence added about the newly-discovered pseudo-thumb. I think most recent changes were very minor.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No content that doesn't belong. There is some content that I would personally add to the page, such as discussion about more recent research that has suggested that the aye-aye arrived in Madagascar separate of the first members of the Lemuriform clade. Additionally, a recent paper suggested that there are two fossils from mainland Africa that can be attributed to the Chiromyiform clade.

Content evaluation
Although there is sparse research that has been done about this species of lemur, there is research that has been published more recently that would be a valuable addition to this article. In particular, there has been some groundbreaking work on the aye-aye genome that has come out of the Perry lab at Penn State, none of which is mentioned in the article. The taxonomy section is a bit outdated; I think it is pretty universally recognized at this point that aye-ayes form a clade basal to that of the Lemuriforms based on genetic evidence. The current debate focuses more on the genetic vs. fossil evidence of when the aye-aye arrived in Madagascar. Finally, it is also pretty universally accepted that aye-ayes belong in their own infraorder, Chiromyiformes, rather than being part of the Lemuriformes infraorder/superfamily.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Like I said before, a lot of the information is simply outdated.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Tone and balance evaluation
Although the article is neutral, most sources are outdated. The only new, updated, information is the addition of the sentence about the pseudo-thumb.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No, it seems like there are several paragraphs of information that contain no citations.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No, like I have said before, there is a lack of current literature.
 * Are the sources current?
 * NO
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Sources and references evaluation
There is a desperate need here for updated sources, especially pertaining to the taxonomy section. There was also a 2017 dissertation that investigated sex-biased dispersal patterns of the aye-aye that could be cited in social organization. There is also a possible avenue for expansion under the "captive breeding", as aye-ayes are still being bred and researched at the Duke Lemur Center and in other zoos (the only source cited is a 1996 article, and two aye-ayes were born at Duke just within the last year!)

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Yes.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes.

Organization evaluation
Not much to discuss here, the article is written with good GUM.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes! Some nice pics of aye-ayes.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * For the most part yes, but there is one picture that just says "Aye-ayes are nocturnal". Is that necessary????
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I think so?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Not really; the images are longer than the article so they extend past the citations.

Images and media evaluation
Maybe integrate some images in to the body of the text so images aren't awkwardly extending past the citations.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There's not that much discussion on the talk page to be honest, there is mostly discussion about the validity of sources/claims seen on the internet, as well as getting opinions on changes.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is not rated. It is part of some WIkiProjects; Primates and Africa/Madagascar.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't talked about Wikipedia in class very much lolllll

Talk page evaluation
Looks like the last big overhaul of this page happened in 2011, and there's not much going on on the talk page. There was a few conversations added on the talk page in 2019 but they were very minor. I'm kind of tempted at this point to overhaul this page myself.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What does this mean?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is a good general overview for perhaps younger audiences that don't care much about the details.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Adding more updated information, and I'm pretty sure the taxonomy isn't correct (Chiromyiformes are a different clade than Lemuriformes, they do not fall under the Lemuriformes clade).
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is very outdated.

Overall evaluation
This article desperately needs to be updated in several categories. There has been a lot of aye-aye research that has happened since the last big overhaul in 2011, and it would be beneficial to update it. Like I said, I am tempted to overhaul this page myself.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: