User:JShaw2003/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Basking shark

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.)

Baskin sharks are a unique looking shark of an impressive size. Often people will hold judgement against sharks due to media which portrays them as predators of humans. However, this is far from the truth. The beauty and diversity of all life, including sharks, should be honored on this platform and I was happy to see an in depth exploration of the sharks features and behaviors as a species. First glances told me that this article holds an abundance of information and has been well developed.

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.)

Review By Julia Shaw

This article is an excellent example of the quality of writing which all Wikipedia's should hope to achieve. Here are some key highlights which make this article so fantastic and some areas in which it can be improves

- Lead section: While there seems to be an absence of a "topic sentence" the article dives straight into a biological discussion of the species which I believe is more fitting for this topic. The Lead section is effective in introducing the major discussion points of the rest of the article, but may do so in too great of detail. This section is quite long and includes some details which are discussed again in their appropriate section. This contributes to some redundancy in the article.

-Content: This article covers the major details of the species with great detail. The abundance of information is impressive and in general up to date. The cited references are dated from 1950s-2013 suggesting a large range of research to cover this topic. Perhaps more recent reports could be included in the bibliography to ensure current knowledge is being presented.

-Tone and Balance: While this article does cover conservation of basking sharks it does a good job simply stating the facts rather than persuading the reader to take any action for or against the sharks conservation.

-Sources or References: As stated earlier, the article should be updated to contain more recent citations. Some sections are abundant with references while other sections are lacking. The Predators section has no citations and must be updated to include a source.

-Organization and Writing quality: This article is well organized, the headings and their respective sections match. Each section serves a role in developing a well rounded summary of the basking shark species. Furthermore, the writing maintains a neutral tone and summarizes biological concepts in a way that is disgustable for a general audience.

-Images and Media: The images of this article are well chosen and purposeful.

-Talk Page Discussion: Large discussion on the legality of copy righted images. The image was later found to be legal for use. Furthermore, some other editors questioned the purpose of the carcass misidentification section and edited specific sentences for clarity. Additionally, other authors have presented updated information and their sources to keep the page relevant. However most of these edits occurred between 2005-2018 with only one contribution in 2022 suggesting that progress on this page has slowed down.

-Overall Impressions: Overall this is a well rounded summary of basking sharks but could use some updating to ensure it maintains up to date information.