User:KPadavich/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: Gram-positive bacteria
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: It is related to my course covering microbial ecology.

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 of this article is succinct and successfully addresses the key information needed to understand the general topic. It addresses most sections of the article and includes links to other articles that may enhance the readers understanding of the topic.

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 article's content does a good job at covering this topic's relevance in microbiology and its applications. There doesn't seem to be any blatantly important information missing.

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
This article seems neutral and unbiased. The viewpoints and writing are presented like scientific writing. This topic is unlikely to be controversial.

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
Many of the sources used to generate this article are reputable scientific journals. Most if not all facts are backed by a reliable source. The published sources date in a range from 1978 to 2016 with most being closer to 2016.

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 seems a little technical in some sections, but they did include links to aid understanding. The sections are easy to navigate. No grammatical or spelling errors were found.

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
The article includes images and diagrams to enhance understanding of the topic. Each image includes a brief caption that helps in identifying what they represent. The images are presented in a non-obtrusive manner. Each image comes from the Wikipedia commons.

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
This article has had 14 different talk threads related to discussion of the topic. The article is part of a Wiki Project on microbiology, it has a C-class rating. This topic differs from class discussion by considering more of the potential applications of the topic.

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
I think this article is pretty solid overall. It includes most of the key information and many sources. The writing of some sections could be improved to increase the readers understanding.

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: