User:Heidi90189676415M/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.

--~ Heidi90189676415M

Option 1

 * Article title:"Plant arithmetic"
 * Article Evaluation:This article caught my attention because it was "S"-rated and is directly related to the topic I have selected for research. The article's content does seem to be linked to its purpose, and the writing itself does not contain bias. Although the work does have multiple citations in the form of numbers, there is one section under the "Venus flytrap" heading that does not have any citations. This is something that could be addressed. As for the citations, they do appear to be reliable, so the information presented within the article is trustworthy. Furthermore, the article does not seem to be focused on addressing equity gaps since its primary purpose is on plants. Finally, the "Talk" page reveals that not many individuals have been working on the article, except for one individual who created a post over five years ago. Furthermore, the article is a part of two WikiProjects: "Plants" and "Cognitive science". The former is rated as "Low-importance", and the latter is shown as "(inactive)". Overall, I think I could add some interesting information in relation to this subject, especially that of Venus flytraps.
 * Work Cited
 * "Plant arithmetic." Wikipedia, Wikipedia, 3 Dec. 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_arithmetic, Accessed 5 Apr. 2024.
 * "Plant arithmetic." Wikipedia, Wikipedia, 3 Dec. 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_arithmetic, Accessed 5 Apr. 2024.


 * Sources:As for sources, I have listed two links that I have found regarding Venus flytrap neurology.
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7355038/
 * https://www.sciencenews.org/article/how-venus-flytraps-store-short-term-memories-prey

Option 2

 * Article title:"Mechanoreceptors (in plants)"
 * Article Evaluation:This article seemed interesting because it discussed a subject within the topic I have chosen to research regarding Venus flytraps. The content of the text does seem to accurately represent its purpose, and the writing is not biased. Although the article does have multiple citations, it only has five sources. I think that this text could be even better if more sources were used. Overall, the sources seem credible and reliable. Similar to the previous article examined, this text does not focus on equity gaps since its primary purpose is that of explaining a topic regarding plants. Lastly, the "Talk" page shows that no one has posted, and the WikiProject that the article is a part of, "Plants", is considered "Low-importance". Although this source pinpoints my research toward one item, which could make it more difficult to add new information, I could potentially build on the information located under the "Venus flytrap" heading.::Work Cited:"Mechanoreceptors (in plants)." Wikipedia, Wikipedia, 11 Nov. 2023, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanoreceptors_(in_plants), Accessed 5 Apr. 2024.
 * Sources:Below, I have included two sources I have found regarding mechanoreceptors in Venus Flytraps.
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8844309/
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8331040/

Option 3

 * Article title:"Cave salamander"
 * Article Evaluation:Even though this article is not about Venus flytraps, it does discuss an animal that seems very interesting. The content of the text does seem to be describing its topic, and the writing does not sound too biased, although there may be one questionable areas. This area occurs when the article says, "With the notable exception of Proteus anguinus," ("Cave salamander"). The word "notable" in "Cave salamander" may not have been necessary. Although the article does include citations, having more sources could improve the work by increasing the amount of content. In the "Reference" list section of the work, it seems like the first, second, and fourth sources are credible. It is difficult to determine the credibility of the third source because the link does not lead one directly to the source. There do not seem to be any equity gaps present due to the focus of the article being on a creature. Finally, the "Talk" page reveals that the article was chosen as an assignment, but no other discussions have occurred. Additionally, the article is a part of two WikiProjects. These are called, "Caves" and "Amphibians and Reptiles". The former has not been given a rating, but the latter has a "Low-importance" rating. In conclusion, I think I could conduct research to help improve this article. However, it does not correlate with my current topic.::Work Cited:"Cave salamander." Wikipedia, Wikipedia, 7 Oct. 2023, en.wikipeida.org/wiki/Cave_salamander, Accessed 5 Apr. 2024.
 * Sources:Below, I have included two sources I have found that could help improve this article.
 * https://www.wildlifedepartment.com/wildlife/field-guide/amphibians/cave-salamander
 * https://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Eurycea_lucifuga/

Option 4

 * Article title:
 * Article Evaluation:
 * Sources:

Option 5

 * Article title:
 * Article Evaluation:
 * Sources: