User:Gbakes11/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Rummy-nose tetra

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.)

- I chose this article because it made me realize that I haven't been to an aquarium in a hot minute

- This article matters for people who want to keep aquarium fish and want to know the proper care and how the fish lives.

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.)

Lead Section

- the lead section could be a bit more concise

- says a decent bit of information that doesn't necessarily need to be listed in the intro rather their respective sections like physical features or the genealogy

- holds some opinion in the fact that it claims it is a favorite among fish keepers however goes on to explain that they have very specific requirements for care

- does not preview sections

Content

- The content is very heavy around the specifications around breeding and how hard it could be,

- All the content is relevant

Tone and Balance

- the article is neutral regarding all the sections with the exception of some verbiage used, I.e., tells us that the fish is a favorite among aquarium keepers and provides some less neutral word usage when saying that breeding these fish is part luck.

- very slight bias toward how these fish are hard to breed

- the section on breeding is very heavy and longer than any other section, however this could be because of how hard and in depth the article says that breeding is, or just because the author got carried away.

- the article does not try to persuade the reader

Sources

- sources look fine although one of the sources is a .com

Organization

- the article is well organized and all the sections stay on topic

- the section on the reproduction is a little longwinded

Imagery and media

-the imagery is good and nicely done

Talk page

- The articles talk page only has one comment about the picture

Overall Impressions

- The articles overall status is a C class article

- The article did a good job with most of the sections being concise and does a good job getting the information across in a easy to read way

- I think that the article can be improved by making the reproduction section a little less long winded, the intro section repeats its self, and it could go a little less in depth about the reproduction

- I would say that the article is middle of the road, i wouldn't say that it is well developed but its not too poorly developed either.