User:Hsavino2016/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: DNA-binding protein
 * This article is of interest because DNA - binding proteins are crucial to many mechanisms

Lead

 * Guiding questions


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

Lead evaluation
The lead begins with a brief introduction to the topic at hand and contains a contents sections that links to the major points within the article. It is very concise and provides examples following the main introduction.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The articles content is relevant to the topic stated. When the references were checked, it seems like there are hardly any sources that are less than 10 years old, so maybe the content can become a little more up to date

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
This article is neutral and nowhere does it show any kind of bias; the facts are presented in a clear and concise manner. There are no instances of persuasion from the author.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Reading through the references, it seems as though there are only three references out of the 30 provided that are less than 5 years old; the majority of the references come from before 2000. Some links were checked to make sure that they were still working, and they did in fact link properly.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
This article was well organized and not overwhelming. It had a nice flow between the sections and it was broken down in a manner than was easy to follow and understand. Th sections were kept brief and to the point, which helped reading it.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
For the article being as brief as it was, having four images to study was helpful, although the layout of the images could have been better. The images were all stacked on top of one another at the beginning of the article; it would have been more visually pleasing to have them spread more throughout the page.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
This article is currently rated C-class under three WikiProjects: Genetics, Molecular and Cell Biology, and Biology. The talk page has a singular announcement about external links and was last updated on Dec 6 2019.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
Overall, this article was easy to read (with the proper background knowledge), and concise. The breakdown of the sections was well done and the author stayed clear of including any biases within the article. The article could be visually improved by spreading out the images provided.

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: