User:Fabiola Zayas/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: Endangered species
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have chosen this article because I like to know what animals are close to getting extinct and how we can prevented to keep the biodiversity.


 * Guiding questions
 * The Lead of this article is concise however it doesn't include a brief description of the article. The Lead has information that is not
 * present in the article like laws and is also overly detailed.
 * present in the article like laws and is also overly detailed.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content of the article is relevant to the topic because it talks about the conservation status and ways to conserve the species, something that is important when we are talking about this specific topic however it barely talks about the factors that can make a specie endangered which is also really important when we are talking about endangered species. After all, it tells us what the activities that we are doing that affect the ecosystem where the species lives. The content of this article is not up to date because it says that the grizzly beard is near exiting and they are have grown in population with means that are not in danger anymore and they are going to be removed from the endangered species list in the United States. The article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equality gaps.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?


 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

This article has a few claims about being heavily biased but they were already fixed but they are still a few. The points of view are overrepresented and the article does not attempt to pursue the reader in favor of any position.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Not all the facts in this article are backed up by a reliable source, for example in the past about Endangered species in the United States says that there data in the Database in the Economics and Management of Endangered Species but there no reference about that where the reader can check the information. Not all the sources are current some of them go back more than fifteen years and not all the links work, some of them are written by multiple authors.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article isn't easy to read but it is concise. The article has a few grammatical and spelling errors like the word leads that it's supposed to be written like lead in the context that is written. This article is well organized


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

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article includes images of some of the species they talk about and a map that I found really helpful because it shows the count of endangered species in each state of the United States they are well caption and adhere to the copyright regulations of Wikipedia. They are not in a visual appealing way because they are all in the same area of the article wich is close to the right like a column wich is kind of odd.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions
 * This article is not part of a Wiki project but it was part of a Wiki Education Foundation trough August to December 2019. The conversation behind the scenes is polite and is looking to help one another and new ways to improve the article as editors.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * Overall the article still needs improvement because is a really important topic, it needs more detailed and updated information cause the status and laws of endangered species are always changing. The article has a lot of supporting external resources which is good and shows the accuracy of the information but is still laking laws and environmental and external factors that make a specie endangered.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

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: