User:Hayley.bowling/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: Brucella suis
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Found it on the C-class article list under microbiology and I'm interested in pigs

Lead

 * Guiding questions


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

Lead evaluation
Overall I think the lead is good, it's too the point and does a good job of getting necessary information across without too much detail.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? not really, the most recent source is from 2016
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? no

Content evaluation
Content seems good but could use more and could be updated.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

Tone and balance evaluation
Tone and balance seems good and neutral.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? I think so
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes but it could use some more recent sources
 * Are the sources current? not really
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes

Sources and references evaluation
Most sources are out of date but there are lots of them and everything is well-cited. All links appear to work and allows user to navigate to related wiki articles.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? not that I can see
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes

Organization evaluation
Well organized and well written. It's basic but gets the necessary information across.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? no, just one image of a culture that is hard to make out
 * Are images well-captioned? the only image is captioned but it's very basic
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? there's only one so I guess so

Images and media evaluation
More images would be beneficial, the article is very word-heavy without any visuals.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The article was moved from "swine brucellosis" (the disease) to the current pathogen name after much debate last year. There was some discussion on additions, such as importance to industry, and questions about a map that apparently used to be included in the article
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? C-class, mid-importance. It's part of the veterinary medicine and microbiology WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? we haven't discussed it in class

Talk page evaluation
There has been some neat discussion and it's cool to see that this article has been moved and re-written as needs evolved.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is pretty substantial but could definitely be improved and updated
 * What are the article's strengths? Good variety of information with appropriate detail, good sources, good organization
 * How can the article be improved? more images, more updated and recent information
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I think it is under- to well-developed.

Overall evaluation
Overall I think the article is good but could use some more images and fleshing-out of recent information.

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: