User:Hlauhon/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because my partner and I are interested in looking at an extinct reptile for our design project. I figured that looking at the basics of reptiles would be a good start. My first impression of the article is a little bit confusing. I think since it is a WikiProject it is set up slightly different than other Wikipedia pages.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

The lead does include an introductory sentence about what the article's topic is. It quickly explains that the article is a collection of entries for amphibians and reptiles, living or extinct. There is a table of contents on the right side of the article page, as well as a section a few paragraphs in on the article contents. There does not seem to be information in the lead about something other than what the article is meant to be about. The lead is concise and not overly detailed.

Content

The article's content is relevant to the topic of amphibians and reptiles, but does not seem to contain very much information. The content does seem to be up to date, as people in the "Talk" section were communicating with one another recently. It seems that there is not much information on amphibians or reptiles on the article's main page. There is a list of several amphibians and reptiles, but no information about any of them. The article does seem like it could be useful in dealing with equity gaps, as when it comes to animals there is definitely more information on mammals than amphibians or reptiles, it just needs to be worked on.

Tone and Balance

The article is neutral. There are not claims that seem to be heavily biased. There are no viewpoints that seem over-represented, but there is quite a bit of information that seems to be missing. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of anything.

Sources and References

There are no sources or references listed on the page. There are links to other articles that may contain relevant information on various amphibians and reptiles. The links do work and redirect to another page or article.

Organization and Writing Quality

This article flows well, but seems like it is missing key information. There is not much information about amphibians or reptiles on it at all. The article does not have grammatical or spelling errors. The article is broken down into sections that make sense, but the sections do not have much information.

Images and Media

The article includes on image of the conservation status, scientific class-action, binomial name, and synonyms for the crested gecko. However, this image seems random as the crested gecko is not written about in the article. The image seems a bit random in itself as there is no specific information on any species. The image itself looks nice and displays a lot of information (more than the article seems to display in writing) about a reptile.

Talk Page Discussion

There are numerous drafts containing information about different amphibian and reptile species in the "Talk" page. People are discussing information that may need to be changed, or information that can be added. There are also archived pages. This article is part of a WikiProject and does not require a rating.

Overall Impressions

I think that this article has a lot of work to do before becoming a comprehensive page for amphibians and reptiles. The "Talk" page is used effectively for this article, which I think gives it a good chance of being a strong article. The article needs to have more information posted to it, as there is more information about how to format the page than there is about amphibians or reptiles. The article as it is now seems underdeveloped.