User:HeyImAl/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
Evaluation Scale: Awful - Bad - Okay - Good - Great

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Opossum (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose Opossum because, although it isn't relating to art history, picking an article that is about something I find really fascinating would make it easier for me to learn how to properly evaluate a wiki article. I know I would take in more information this way and be more prepared when it comes time to evaluate other articles.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, intro sentence is concise and clear.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, all the sections of the article are listed under 'Contents'
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, all the info is present.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is a bit detailed but I think the information presented there is important.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? There's a line under Etymology that reads "which Smith helped to found and where Strachey later served as its first secretary." I feel like this detail is unimportant as it does not relate to opossums.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes, the most recent edit was made today, Feb 5, 2020.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The average size of a litter is not mentioned, they just say females give birth to "very large numbers" of young. They say just underneath that line that 13 babies are able to feed from the mother and the rest don't survive, but that still doesn't give average litter size.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes it is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? They all seem to be very neutral opossum facts.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, doesn't try to sway the viewer.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, while it does describe the features of a possum it never tries to convince the reader if they are cute/ugly/etc.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? There is a fact under Diet about opossums needing high amounts of calcium that is lacking a source, it says [citation needed] after it.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, while there are some historical/older newspaper references there's also newer scientific articles/text relating to their characteristics and lifestyle. It is a broad range of citations.
 * Are the sources current? Some are current others are a bit older but still have reliable information.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? All the links I checked have functioned.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, while the appropriate scientific names and terms are used, it is not littered with difficult to digest jargon.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, I did not find any errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, although the Habitat section is in need of expansion, it is a significantly smaller section than the others. It could maybe expand on the information presented in the lead that states "possums originated in South America and entered North America in the Great American Interchange following the connection of the two continents. Their unspecialized biology, flexible diet, and reproductive habits make them successful colonizers and survivors in diverse locations and conditions."

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, each of the images attached relate to the topic of the section they are in and help explain it.
 * Are images well-captioned? All of them are well captioned except the very first one. It says, "The Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) is the only species in the U.S.". While they likely meant it is the only species of didelphimorphia, it reads as if it is the only animal we have in the U.S. This could be fixed by inserting "of didelphimorphia'" between "species" and "in".
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? The Images under "Classification" feel a little scattered but the others look good.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There's a section in the talk page about the opossums low risk of rabies and how facts about that should be included. I find it interesting that nothing about their immune system/body temperature usually preventing rabies, except in rare cases, has not been added.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Level-4 vital article in Biology, B-Class
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Wiki, at least in the main article, sticks with facts and hard data. In class we go more in depth with different views/opinions. Although in the talk page some of the discussions span into the silly side, someone mentioned they've fed their local possum Cheetos and they seemed to enjoy the crunch. That kinda fun content we usually don't get in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I'd say overall It falls into a "Good" category. It's in need of some little changes here and there but for the most part it's a solid article.
 * What are the article's strengths? It has a lot of good citations, very neutral tone, and almost all of the sections are filled out with useful information.
 * How can the article be improved? aside from the little tweaks I listed above, the main point of improvement would be expanding the Habitat section.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is very well developed aside from the lack of information in the habitat section.

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: Link