User:DerekE9831/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating the article on Daphne Koller.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this biography because the subject of the article has been and continues to be involved with some very intriguing topics, such as AI and medicine, and has also been a leader in the online education environment, as one of the co-founders of Coursera.

Evaluate the article
The article is fairly detailed and thorough, and contains a litany of resources cited. Of all the cited sources I examined, they all appeared to live up to Wikipedia's standards, though I did not examine every single one of them in great detail. The tone throughout was professional and maintained a neutral perspective. There were a couple of spots that didn't necessarily have grammatical errors, but the writing came across as clunky, as if the person writing it had a difficult time expressing the idea. Specifically I'm looking at this sentence from the fourth paragraph in the Career and Research section: "The company operates an automated lab equipment running on algorithms that use its own in vitro disease models." I kind of get the idea that sentence is trying to communicate, but it could definitely be structured better, especially on the front end.

Overall, I think the article is strong at highlighting Daphne's experience and educational background, but it's clear that, especially having 34 sources available to draw from on this article alone, that there is a lot left on the table. It's clear that this woman has done and continues to do many great things in technology, biology, and education. But her article is very brief. It took me probably five minutes to read. So a lot of the content was kind of stuffed in there, condensed, and not really expanded upon in a meaningful way. It's a great summary article, but could be greatly improved by just expanding on her body of work in more detail.