User:Emaddox2/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating? Medical entomology
Medical entomology

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.)

This article is important to understanding the impact of insects in the health of humans. The article seems to still be in the editing stages and it is not refined yet.

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 section is informative and alludes to what will be in the coming sections, whoever it does not have and citations. The lack of citations, especially when stating facts hurts the credibility of the article and can be plagiarism. There are a few writing errors in capitalization throughout the article as well. While the content of the article is good for the most part, the organization of the information could be better. The sentences get confusing each for the sections, and maybe trying different sentence structures may help with clarity. There may be a better way to organize the different sections to be easier to read and comprehend. The images for the article are not very helpful, and more images of the insects or the viruses they carry could be useful for the reader.

The talk page of the article is active and it has its own evaluation sections for the article. Many of the comments in the talk article are about the inconsistencies in the structure making it a hard read, the lack of relevant citations, and grammatical errors. Overall the status of the article is that it is a work in progress and there is a lot of room for improvement. It is not yet developed and many of the suggestions should be taken into consideration.