User:Keburt/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Calming signals

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I was first introduced to the term, "Calming signals" as a preteen at a veterinary camp at the Atlantic Veterinary College in Prince Edward Island during a course on canine behavior. Prior to this, I had never owned (but always wanted) a dog of my own. It was my first introduction to canine behavior, and I learned many concepts that I applied to training my own dog when I rescued one several years later. People differ vastly with their approaches to analyzing canine behavior, but it is important to understand the foundation of how they communicate with each other, and even with humans. If we understand how dogs communicate, we can interact appropriately with the dog, or we can identify and remove the animal from uncomfortable situations. I have been working at an animal shelter for over a year and a half and it is crucial to accurately interpret the demeanor of new canine intakes to prevent dangerous situations, such as dog bites, and to place the dogs in homes where they will prosper. My initial impression of the article was that it lacked appropriate and reputable sources. Immediately after opening the article, there was a warning banner stating that the article uses too many primary sources. A quick glance over the (albeit short) article, made it clear that it needed some revising.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of the article leaves something to be desired. While it does claim how the term was introduced, it does not accurately describe what the topic itself is. The beginning sentences should have explained, in some form, what a calming signal is. Calming signals are a series of behavioral actions performed by canines to communicate, and to claim that they are "used by dogs to communicate", as stated in the article, is an oversimplification of a vast and complex grouping of behaviors. The second paragraph of the lead section lists numerous contributors of calming signal- focused illustrations and articles, but the article itself does not touch on their work in any other instances (other than to include a few illustrations). While the referenced illustrations and articles are relevant to the topic, listing them without providing a more in-depth analysis of their content provides unnecessary tidbits of information to readers that do not further their understanding of the topic. This defeats the purpose of a Wikipedia article. Furthermore, the lead section briefly includes three types of communication used by dogs and compares these behaviors to those observed in ancestral species. This is a broad claim that is not elaborated on in the article itself and should be removed or expanded upon in an appropriate section of the article.

The content of the article is a bare representation of various behaviors that constitute as calming signals. The major sections present information in list form and fail to explain the studies and proof behind the claims. There are also several ideas stated in short sentences that do not clarify or contribute to the overall subject of the article. An example of this is found under the "Sniffing the Ground" section. Here, the author of the article states that dogs will sniff the ground as a calming signal. This is an open-ended statement that does not explain in what situations a dog may do this, why they exhibit this behavior as a calming signal, or how this behavior was developed. The bulk of this article presents information in this way that is not well-developed. There are statements made in the lead section that are not relevant to the topic. Such is exemplified in the third paragraph, where the author vaguely touches on reproduction-driven sexual behavior and displays of aggression in ancestral species. This information is not pertinent to the subject of the article and should not be included. Lacking from the article is how these calming signals were discovered, studied, and classified. While it is helpful to present which behaviors are classified as calming signals, there needs to be further explanation of the actions themselves. A section of the article titled, "Use of signals by Dogs," is a bleak and unclear delivery of the circumstances in which a dog will use calming signals. The information is choppy, not supported by evidence, and draws its material from one primary source. The article presents information retrieved from articles written in the early-mid 2000's and 2010's. Since this time there has been improvement on research into canine behavior and studies have been conducted that would be more relevant and up to date for the subject of this article.

While the information presented is of a neutral tone, the article draws heavily from claims made by a single person (Turid Rugaas) and presents only this viewpoint. The entire "Use of Signals by Dogs" section is referencing his work and only his work. This limits the information presented to solely his observations and claims, and it is likely that the author did not consult other sources on that subtopic before writing the article. As a result, Rugaas' viewpoints are overrepresented and there is a drastic lack of diversity in the source material. Such an imbalance of presented information risks indirectly persuading the reader in favor of said viewpoint, as it is the only one represented. Much of the information is sourced from dog training manuals and thus it is likely that the information is biased towards their personal opinions on dog behavior and how it should be interpreted. The authors of such training guides have financial and personal motives for presenting their opinions on the topic and thus their viewpoint should not be the sole viewpoint presented, if presented at all. These training materials are not independent of the subject and therefore should not be included as the main source of information.

The sources and references of the article are not sufficient for the claims made. Throughout the article, the author states one person's opinion on canine behavior as fact, when it is not backed up by scientific studies or another appropriate form of proof. Many of the referenced works are published on dog-focused forums, blogs, books, or magazines. There are better studies explaining calming signals and their origins from peer-reviewed sources. There are several relevant articles in the Journal of Veterinary Behavior that are study-based and peer-reviewed that could have been used. Such articles are a more reliable secondary source of information, as opposed to the primary sources used presently. There are several instances throughout the article where information is presented as fact, but no source for the claims is listed. An example of this is under the "Licking/tongue flicks" subsection. The author states that black dogs and dogs with longer hair are especially known to using lip licking as a calming signal. This is a new piece of information that requires proof from a reliable source. Throughout the article it is stated that dogs will see these signals and subsequently respond to them, but there is no referenced material to show where and why this claim is made. To add, many of the referenced works are from the early 2000's and 2010's, so it is likely they contain outdated and disproven information. The warning banner that appears at the top of the page states that the article uses too many references to primary sources and needs more material referenced from secondary and tertiary sources, which further suggests it requires more suitable sources for the information presented.

The article lacks concision. Many statements are redundant and unnecessary. The article is difficult to read as there is no natural flow of information and facts are inserted at random with no clear purpose. There are several grammatical errors and sentence structure is weak with informal vocabulary. Sentences are overly long, short, or incorrectly formatted on several occasions. In the article, a dog's behavior is described as "silly." Using informal terms with several meanings leave too much room for interpretation. In one case, "silly" can be thought of as either playful or neurotic: two vastly different concepts. Behaviors should be described clearly without applying interpretable characteristics that could confuse the reader. The portion of the article that lists the various calming signals has potential to be a concise and informative section but can be improved with more information and referenced material.

The images throughout the article help to provide a visual representation of the different calming signals. The images do not appear to be sourced from a public domain and are not appropriately credited to the original owner. The images do not blatantly appear to be copyrighted content; however, this still violates Wikipedia policies as the images are not cited. The illustrated images on the right-hand side of the page appear to have an artist's signature and are likely copyrighted material. The author of the article fails to cite the source for these illustrations as well. When you click on the photos, the information within shows that the author is claiming the photos as her own work, which is likely not the case. The captions on the photos are vague and contain grammatical errors. Image formatting can be improved by adjusting the sizes and locations of the embedded photos and illustrations to achieve a more visually appealing article.

The article's Talk page reflects a general lack of interest in the progress of the article. There is a single non-bot post that was made in August of 2019 that was drawing attention to the lack of diversity in source material, but no changes were made. Underneath this statement, there is a bot-generated message from June of 2020 that states that one of the linked articles within the calming signals article has been nominated for deletion. This suggests that the article may link several more Wikipedia articles that are poorly developed and not reliable. In the "Revision History" tab, there are a few minor changes (from several years ago) to the layout, grammar, and spelling. There were also small additions of information, but no evidence of adding appropriate secondary sources. Overall, there is an absence of active discussions surrounding the article. The article is not yet rated and is not apart of any WikiProjects.

The "Calming Signals" article has reached a stagnant point, with no major changes being made for several years. The article is a short and quick read, which may be beneficial for those looking for a very quick overview of some of the common calming signals. Despite this, the presentation of the material is vague, unsupported by evidence from secondary sources, and contains unnecessary information. The most concerning aspect is the lack of citations for the images and illustrations, which may be a direct copyright violation and are not permitted to be used in this way on Wikipedia. There are several improvements that can be made to the article to make it easier to read, and to ensure that it contains factual information. The article is poorly developed in its current state as it contains several errors and lacks large portions of information pertinent to the subject.