User:FatimahB/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Fatimah -- Please assign yourself either Option 2 (social monogamy in mammals) or Option 4 (pair bond). Either of those would be fine. –– Prof. W.

Option 1

 * Article title:Monogamy
 * Article Evaluation:Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes Is it written neutrally? No Does each claim have a citation? No  Are the citations reliable? Some are   Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)? No  Check out the article's Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page, too: The talk page has a lot of discussion on the designation of the "moral value" of monogamy. Definitely need to distinguish between science and morals on this page. There is an issue with linking this page to unrelated areas.
 * Sources:

Option 2

 * Article title:Social monogamy in mammalian species
 * Article Evaluation:Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes Is it written neutrally? Yes Does each claim have a citation? Yes  Are the citations reliable? Yes, could use more.  Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)? No  Check out the article's Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page, too: The talk page does not have a discussion going but the content is very sparse and more content could be added.
 * Sources:

Option 3

 * Article title:Monogamy in animals
 * Article Evaluation:Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes Is it written neutrally? Yes, though some of it is confusing because of the counterargument presentation. Does each claim have a citation? Yes  Are the citations reliable? Yes, but more could be added  Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)? No  Check out the article's Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page, too: The talk page asks for expansion.
 * Sources:

Option 4

 * Article title:Extra-pair copulation
 * Article Evaluation:Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes Is it written neutrally? Yes Does each claim have a citation? Yes  Are the citations reliable? Yes  Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)? Yes  Check out the article's Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page, too: This article's talk page is filled with peer reviews and discussion of expansion of topics.
 * Sources:

Option 5

 * Article title:Pair bond
 * Article Evaluation:Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes Is it written neutrally? Yes Does each claim have a citation? Yes  Are the citations reliable? Yes  Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)? No  Check out the article's Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page, too: The talk page calls for clarity. The article is at times very confusing. The talk page also calls for an expansion on the examples.
 * Sources: