User:Jpeloquin17/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: Camouflage
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. [I chose this article to further understand the evolutionary trend of organisms who use camouflage to evade predators.

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 Lead begins with the general definition of the word camouflage, and immediately after goes into specific examples to compliment the definition. Alongside the lead are two images, the first being a biological example of camouflage, the peacock flounder uses camouflage to hide from predators. The second example is of a military soldier, who uses camouflage clothing to blend in with it's environment and hide from the enemy, similar to the biological usage. The lead generally describes the article's major sections, but not all of them. The article addresses the military usage of camouflage as a large topic of interest for this article and goes in depth for about one paragraph about military use, while it then addresses every other use of camouflage as "non-military". The lead contains information that can be found in the article itself. The lead is generally concise, however, the part of the lead that talks about military usage can be cut down.

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
Yes, the article's content is very relevant to the topic. Camouflage as a topic is very general and has many applications. The article goes through the history of camouflage, it's principles and characteristics (such as resemblance to surroundings, disruptive coloration, eliminating shadow, etc.), applications of camouflage (both military and non-military, such as for hunting, civil structures, fashion, art, society, etc.). Searching through the bibliography and content of the article, it does not seem to have been updated with new sources in some time. The latest article credited is from 2015, which is about 4 years ago, however, not much has changed about camouflage and it's applications which could be reason why we do not see many new updates. Indeed this could change in the future. The article is very throughout on each specific topic that it touches upon, giving detailed information. For example, in the military applications, the article touches upon the evolutionary use of camouflage through time, beginning with before 1880s, to world war II, to modern day. The article goes into great, up-to-date detail about the biological uses that natural selection has chosen for organisms and examples, such as the 'pepper moth", which are caterpillars who mimic twigs on trees. There appears to be no content that is alarming or missing from this article.

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 tone of this article is generally neutral. However, there are some topics that are very underrepresented, while others are over represented. Specifically, towards the end of the article, the "Hunting" section is only given a small section, however, hunters have been using camouflage for centuries, and there is a deep, rich history to using camouflage for hunting. Hunting is large aspect to how first humans were able to stay alive and reproduce, which is a big deal in terms of how we use similar aspects of camouflage in our military today. I believe that the military aspect of camouflage is slightly over represented in this article. The lead touches upon analysis of the military application, which creates a disrupted balance in the importance of the biological application. It can be argued that the biological origin of camouflage is much more important to the history of camouflage and I believe that the article should make the biological aspect a larger focus. This may lead the reader into thinking that the military application is the more extraordinary position to be reading about, however, it should be more appreciated to understand how evolution and natural selection has built in camouflage into organisms' DNA to protect them from predators and allow those organisms to reproduce and survive.

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
Yes, all of the facts are backed up by scientific, reliable secondary sources of information. The sources reflect the literature on the topic, and are relevant to the discussion. The sources are rather older, ranging from 1900's to 2015. There are not many articles from 2016-2019, so this article has not been updated with modern sources, however, there may not be a ton of new information on camouflage, which may be the explanation for why we see this trend.

After clicking on several links, I did not run into any problems, they are all working and updated.

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
This article is well-written; each section that is covers is very clear and concise about what it is discussing. The headers and bold topic sections make the article organized and easy for anyone to understand. There are few grammatical or spelling errors, or at least very few that I was able to catch. The article is written professionally and easy for anyone to understand. The article, as stated earlier, is broken down into very specific sections that reflect the topic of camouflage very well. There are numerous (more than 20) sections of camouflage that the article covers, which is fair and truthful to how extensive and applicable camouflage is.

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
There are numerous images throughout the article that enhance the understanding of the topic. Each section of the article contains AT LEAST one image. There are about 30 sections of discussion about camouflage in this article, and each of these sections contains at least one image, but most of them have more than one. This helps the reader understand the topic at hand even further. All of the images adhere to the Wikipedia copyright regulations. The images are laid out in a clever way, each section has an image next to it's description which helps both visual learners and learners who gain knowledge through reading the information.

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
The article Camouflage has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Biology. Wikiproject military history rated GA-Class, Wikiproject Ecology rated GA-Class High importance, and the WikiProject Evolutionary Biology rated GA-Class Mid-Importance. There is a very low level of conversation for this article; one person made a modification to two external links on the article. The person added two archived links, however, no one responded to the person and no other conversation was pushed forward. We did not cover the topic of camouflage in class.

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
The article overall has been listed as one of the "Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria". The article covers the biological aspects of camouflage extensively, which is a strong strength because the natural sciences is of high importance and relevance when it come to the topic of camouflage. The article can be improved but talking less about the military aspect and more about other applications, such as hunting, evolution, and more biology. Overall, the article is very well developed. It summarized camouflage well in the lead section, and it goes into enough detail through the content of the article while also being concise about the detailed. This article has been nominated a couple of times for it's completeness, thorough detail and organization. This is a complete, organized article.

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: