User:Jawabii01/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Fetal pig

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.)

I chose this article because I believe there is plenty of information that can be written about this topic. It matters because fetal pigs are something commonly use in our learning system and the more that can be written on the topic the better we can make use of it. My preliminary impression was that it should be a good starting point for my first article being it is rated as "start-class" on the projects quality scale.

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.)

The article I chose contains a good lead section, the first sentence tells you the definition of the topic of interest. It states some of what will be written in the article. The article is very concise and does not note of anything not stated in the article. It contains a decent amount of information, not overly detailing one topic while neglecting another. I do not believe the article is out dated, its last edit was September, 2022. No major content missing or representation of any underrepresented groups. The article is fine in neutrality, doesn't show any signs of being bias or persuasiveness towards anything certain. All facts of the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source most being from the mid 2000s and a pair or group of authors. They do work. It does consist of well captioned images stating where on the pig the image can be found. They do adhere to copyright violations and are visually appealing. There are conversations about safety, preparation, why pigs are used, etc. It is rated star class, low-importance and part of WikiProject biology. We haven't talked about fetal pigs in class. The article is well formatted and contains adequate sourcing. There is room for additional information. Well-developed article.