User:EmmaGreene22/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Guppy

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have heard of the Guppy fish and am curious to know more about it through my evaluation of the article.

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 concise and informative. It serves as an introduction to the fish, however I would not say it serves as an introduction to the article itself. I say this because there is a bit of information that are tangent like and is not needed, especially at the end of the paragraph. For example, there is no whole section regarding a Guppy’s fins, yet detail is given regarding them. This makes it seem redundant. Other than this one line I think the lead section is a good introduction into the page.

The content never strays from the topic and stays relevant. The information is up to date as the last time it was edited was one January 10th, 2024.

The article is neutral. There seem to be no biases and no distain for Guppies.

The article is heavily cited. After clicking on many of the resources, it can be seen that the links are current, relevant, and accessible.

The article is well written and easy to follow as it begins with basics on the Guppy fish and slowly works it way up to more niche details.

The article as multiple images of the Guppy that I found helpful in regards to the information being given. This is seen in the lead, descriptive, in the aquarium, reproduction, feeding, and predation sections. Each image has a link to where it was previously found or who gave the editor permission to use the picture.

Behind the scenes editors are giving reasoning to their edits, for example, Allasse0927 made edits as a part of a class’s curriculum. There is also a request for more information within the description section and a request for information to be supported in the mating section. The article is rated in the C-class with involvement in wiki projects such as aquarium fishes and fishes.

I think an article with such a vague topic like an entire species of fish could always be improved with more information. However, the information that is provided is concise and easily readable for a general audience.