User:IllyFerg/Evaluate an Article

Lead section explains the scientific method and the process of the scientific method.

Content explains the history of the scientific method with specific examples. The information is up to date with dates from the 2000s and historical references to the 1000s. The overview section explains each aspect of the scientific method. The last subsection "analysis" has little citations so most of the information isn't source.

Tone and balance is neutral and includes a lot of informational components of the scientific method.

Sources are a from different times, some from the 1940s until the 2000s. The sources I clicked on were all accessible and majority were books or scientific articles from reputable universities.

Organization is okay. The article is lengthy and has a lot of technical terms, it is difficult to follow though it is informative.

Pictures and images are well referenced.

The talk section is composed of a correction, and a few edits. One of the edits was not made because it was an opinionated statement and nothing was suggested to be added.

Overall the article could be more readable.

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Scientific method

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose it because we were talking about miasmas in our plagues and people class and the scientific method had to be used to deprove the theory of miasma.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead section explains the scientific method and the process of the scientific method.

Content explains the history of the scientific method with specific examples. The information is up to date with dates from the 2000s and historical references to the 1000s. The overview section explains each aspect of the scientific method. The last subsection "analysis" has little citations so most of the information isn't source.

Tone and balance is neutral and includes a lot of informational components of the scientific method.

Sources are a from different times, some from the 1940s until the 2000s. The sources I clicked on were all accessible and majority were books or scientific articles from reputable universities.

Organization is okay. The article is lengthy and has a lot of technical terms, it is difficult to follow though it is informative.

Pictures and images are well referenced.

The talk section is composed of a correction, and a few edits. One of the edits was not made because it was an opinionated statement and nothing was suggested to be added.

Overall the article could be more readable.