User:ItsChowChow/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Biological system

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen to evaluate this article since I thought it was relevant to this class. Furthermore, I liked the fact that the article was divided into multiple sections that covered the multiple aspects of the biological system starting from its history. My overall impression of the article was that although it was a good start, I think more information could have been added. But, the article did a great job as an introduction to multiple biological systems.

Lead

 * The lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely describes the article's topic. Also, I liked the fact that the lead sentence gave a definition of a biological system to grab the reader’s attention.
 * The lead gives good descriptions of what will be discussed in the article's major sections. The lead does not include information that is not present in the article.
 * Overall, the lead is written concisely and presents a good introduction to what will be discussed in the article.

Content

 * The article provides up-to-date content that is relevant to the topic.
 * There is no content that does not belong to the topic.
 * However, there were gaps in the content of the article. More information could've been provided on the relationship between populations of organisms in regards to the biological systems. The article does a great job in discussing micro biological systems but lacks information on macro biological systems.

Tone and Balance

 * The article is written from a neutral point of view and there are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position. This article provides a good scientific view of the topic and provides relevant information in a neutral tone.
 * In terms of the balance of content, the article mostly focuses on the micro biological systems but does not have much information on macro biological systems. More information on the macro biological systems could be added.

Sources and References

 * All facts are backed up by reliable sources. However, some of the sources were not current. There were few sources that were published in the 1800s. I definitely think these sources can be replaced with more current sources that have up-to-date information.
 * The sources are from a diverse spectrum of authors but I think peer-reviewed articles can replace some of the sources.
 * I checked few links and they worked but the sources from the 1800s did work but they could be replaced by up-to-date peer-reviewed articles.

Organization and writing quality

 * The article is concisely written and it is easy to read.
 * The article does not have any major grammatical or spelling errors. However, I could notice a couple of minor grammatical errors such as missing articles.
 * The organization of the article could be improved. The history should be presented first to give the readers relevant background and then the relevant content should be presented. The sections were broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic.

Images and Media

 * The article includes one image that helps the readers understand the organ and tissue system. The image follows Wikipedia's copyright regulations and is laid out in a visually appealing way.
 * However, more images could be added to help readers understand the macro biological system such as the relationship between the population of organisms and the environment.

Talk page discussion

 * The talk page mostly talks about the lack of the macro biological system and too much focus on the human system.
 * This article is rated as a C-class and is involved in WIkiProject Systems, Biology, Animal anatomy, and physiology.
 * The Wikipedia article does not put emphasis on the larger macro biological system like we talked about in class but focuses too much on the micro biological system.

Overall impressions

 * Overall, I would give this article a B- rating. The article has a good lead and provides relevant information on the micro biological system such as organ and human biological system. However, the article lacks information on the larger macro biological system. Without information on the macro biological system, the article cannot be marked as complete. I would not consider this article well-developed since it lacks relevant information.