User:Jc23999/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: P700
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: This is one of the newest topics that were taught in Biochemistry class. When I was first learning about it, I had not understood it clearly thus, had to Google the topic to find more information on it. However, the information was very limited and even Wikipedia only had about two-three sentences of information, which was not useful. As a result, after comprehending and researching a little more about the topic of Photosystem I, I realized that I could assist others that may have the same problem I had previously when learning this topic.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The main topic of this Wikipedia page is P700, also known as the reaction center of Photosystem I. The introductory sentence somewhat described the article’s topic, should have a better choice of words. There are no other sections within the article, except for a brief summary of the function of P700 and its comparison to P680. Lead is not concise and should be more detailed, including the mechanism of action of P700 in the organisms that possess it. Overall, the Lead is the only paragraph shown in this page, making it a very poor article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
The content present is relevant to the topic, briefly summarizing P700. However, it is also missing a large amount of information about the function, and complete description of the reaction that takes place in the reaction center. The content is up-to-date since it was last edited on December 2019. But definitely, missing more content on the topic as a whole.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The viewpoints that are over-represented are the comparison of P700 and P680, instead of solely describing P700 as a whole. However, overall, the article is neutral and does not attempt to persuade the reader into taking a position.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
There are no citations at all present in this page. Thus, no reliable articles or journals that are backing up the information presented on the Wikipedia page about P700.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
The article is not very concise, as it mostly described P700 by comparing it to P680. There are no grammatical or spelling errors. The main problem is that it lacks some information of P700, and only gives a very brief summary of its function. Thus, lacks organization and is not broken down into sections to explain it thoroughly.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
No images included currently. However, a diagram of the mechanism of action of P700 could be useful to enhance understanding of the topic, while also adhering to Wikipedia’s copyright regulations.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
Only one comment on the Talk Page, posted one year ago, criticizing the information that is currently present for P700. It is mentioned that the article does not have any specific organization and claims about the topic. The information presented is not concise and described as a whole. This page is part of the WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology. It is rated as Stub-class, indicating that there isn’t much information provided in the page. It is also rated as mid-importance on the project’s importance scale, denoting that it is a topic that is taught in higher-level college courses. Wikipedia discusses this topic differently since it just shows a condensed version of all the information that was actually taught in Biochemistry class. In class, not only are there comparisons of P700 and P680, but also diagrams that show how it is all connected in organisms that confer it.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
Overall, this article is poorly developed since there is immense amount of information that is missing and should be explained to further explain P700. The article’s strengths is that it takes into consideration some differences and similarities with P680. However, instead of solely comparing throughout most of the article, P700 should be explained more concisely since it is a page that only focuses on that one topic. Thus, the article is not complete and needs to be improved largely.

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: