User:Italics456/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Cell death

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I find the concept interesting - it's the process that governs which cells we are made up of and which ones die. It's also one of the processes that has to fail before someone gets cancer. This is a natural process for the life cycle of all organisms; some cells are going to have to die. Therefore, it holds a lot of importance within the world of biology. My preliminary impression of the article is that it seems to have good information but isn't super thorough or detailed. There are a lot of citations, but those mostly belong to a list of examples and the key information of the article is only connected to one or two sources.

Evaluate the article

 * lead section is fine, but doesn't mention the study of cell death under the name necrobiology, which is a whole section later on, so it should claim at least a mention in the lead section
 * key ideas (like apoptosis) only have one or two citations - it would be better for them to be drawing that information from more sources
 * it has only been edited by two people (both student editors)
 * lead is concise and provides a good summary, though it doesn't go section-by-section or include all of the sections, and doesn't include things that aren't in the actual article
 * the content of the article is up-to-date and relevant, but a little unbalanced. I think we need more information about necrosis and necrotic cell death, given the disproportionate amount of information on programmed cell death.
 * there is no equity gap in this content
 * the article is neutral, unpersuasive, and informative. It's not trying to sway the reader to one side of something, it's simply presenting the facts.
 * the sources seem to be good sources, though there are not very many that correspond to the main body of the article. They are written by several different people and address different aspects of this topic.
 * the article is well-written and well-organized. I didn't notice any spelling or grammar errors.
 * the images do relate to the topic well, however, I feel that a better image could be chosen to replace the first image representing the process leading to apopotosis. The image chosen is quite confusing if you don't already know a lot about apoptosis, and Wikipedia is meant to just provide an overview. The complicated nature of the image makes it difficult for it to do so.
 * overall, this is a strong article, but it would be really good to have a few more people work on it (it's only been worked on by 2 people, both student editors). It could also use some more citations and a little more organization to make it a really great article.