User:In Vita Veritas/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: (link) Adrenaline
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: As this was done for a class assignment I wanted to choose a hormone I was somewhat familiar with already. Adrenaline fit this criteria because I already had basic knowledge of its structure and some functions from other biology courses

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise detailing the uses of adrenaline and where it’s produced without extraneous details that I was able to determine.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Not that I was able to determine from reading it.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not that I can tell
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? The most recent sources mentioned in the article are from within the last 5 years
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Hard to say but given how some of the sources are from pre 1950 this is doubtful
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I noticed
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes but has one extraneous section about adrenaline junkies

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Only pictures of the chemical formula
 * Are images well-captioned? Titled yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? They are ok but since it’s chemical structures and pathways it’s hard to make it visually appealing.

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 is talk of merging this article with an article about epinephrine as a medication.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes in four separate categories it’s rated b class with low to mid importance
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We haven’t covered this yet in class

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Seems up to date.
 * What are the article's strengths? Concise
 * How can the article be improved? Remove adrenaline junkie segment since while sharing the same name it doesn’t add to the subject
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?well developed

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: Talk:Adrenaline