User:Jamieb0318/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: Torpor
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I choose a word I was unaware of out of the list of C-class articles to learn more about it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

Yes. It concisely describes the biological nature of Torpor without going into the bounds of other biologically comparable states. While it does not list the potential functions and reasons behind going into torpor, the lead does provide a good amount of fundamental information to provide an un-educated reader the unique concept of a torpor without being overly detailed.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article stays relevant to the topic. The discussion on evolution of torpor is discussed briefly while lending itself enough space to explain the the readers the indications of this evolutionary process. The article also provides basic information on the functions of the torpor. In addition, the article ends with how this biological process is being studied for future implementation (NASA studying it to understand how to induce prolonged sleep phases for humans in sending a mission to far distances such as Mars). However, the article very short and definitely can have additional information and research added. Also, more information on how it is different from other forms of dormancy can be provided. (For example, additional information and real life examples of comparison to hibernation and sleep.)


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article maintains a neutral, scholarly voice without being too elegant. It is simplistic in its language which allows any readers to understand its content.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Most of not all points were tied to citations. Sources cover a wide range of publication dates in representing how the study has progressed. However, additional newer resources can be used to provide more information behind torpor for the article. The links are working.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

Article is clear and concise. It is easy to read for the everyday, non-academic readers. I did not observe any grammatical or spelling errors. It is well organized into different sections that are very easy to navigate.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

There is no use of images or other forms of media to support the article.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The talk page is being used to bring about conversation about the definition of the topic (torpor) and how it relates or is different from the related topics such as dormancy, sleep, and heterothermy. It also points out grammatical and conceptual errors related to the article.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall, the article is a easy-to-read, simple, concise article for the everyday user. As a student who does not know much about this topic, it taught me the basics of this topic, well enough that I feel l can recognize and understand the concept in forms of discussion. However, it was not thorough in describing its uniqueness and differentiating the topic from other related topics that are similar in nature (hibernation, sleep, etc.) In addition, it did not go into depth the current studies that are being done to study this topic thoroughly either. This article can be more detailed and supported with more real life information as well as more details of studies surrounding this topic.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly 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: