User:Hancock013/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Beelzebufo

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.)

It seemed interesting, but upon looking at the talk page, I saw it had a lot of edits and comments I could potentially learn from

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: good, but doesn't contain description of major sections.

Content: pretty short overall and could be added to, but there might not be much information available to pull from.

Tone and balance: neutral article (good!)

Source and references: some are from reputable science journals, but some are from public media articles (BBC News, Associated Press); the same journal is also used more than once.

organization and writing quality: good

images and media: good amount, could potentially have one more, but the pictures are well placed and aid in the understanding of the subject.

Talk page discussion: previous comments have been taken into account and edits made

Overall impressions: the only improvements needed are updates when more scientific literature comes out