User:Klkelly02/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
"Cell (biology)"

Wikipedia contributors. "Cell (biology)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 18 Sep. 2023. Web. 24 Sep. 2023.

** This was not my article I ultimately decided to edit one week later but it was the first article I learned how to evaluate on for week 4**

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 choose this article because I had known when choosing my article that I wanted one created by a group. of contributors that was related to our class so that I could see how different writing styles and inputs flowed together into a singular page. The most relevant part to what we are learning in class at the moment is the breakdown of each of the cell organelles and their descriptions, as well as the process on protein synthesis as what we are doing right now in relation to protein transport ties in really well with both. My overall impressions was that it seemed to be your traditional basic approach to cells and cell biology, not nearly as specific as what we do in class but I don't think that it's is supposed to be or needs to be that specific.

Evaluate the article
Lead Selection

I really like how there is a broad opening statement where the rese of the lead section can then fall under. Additionally, this section has short summaries of each of the articles topics that are very seamlessly incorporated and transitioned between. My one critique is tha tI feel the lead section is a bit lengthy because of the descriptions and background information given on each of the sections as opposed to just brief descriptions of them all.

Content

As far as content goes, all is very well related back to the main topic. One thing I did notice is that some of the content may need to be refreshed and updated because it is based on sources that are over 30 years old. I also feel like there was a disproportionate focus between the components of the cells and the functions of the cells. I think more information could be put into the functions of the cells section, especially the protein synthesis, even if just a brief sentence on how different types of cells utilize proteins in a multitude of different ways. I also noticed a link to a page that no longer exists.

Tone and Balance

Overall, the tone was very neutral and factually driven. As stated above, the only truly disproportionate representation of ideas was just the amount that was present for each organelle as opposed to the functions of these cells.

Sources and References

My biggest critique with the sources and references is that they seem dated. Especially when dealing with a field like Cell Biology in as broad of an approach as the creators took, I just don't feel that have sources that are well over 30 years old reflects the progressions in the field and as a result could be feeding readers with out of date information. There additionally is a link to a source that does not exist.

Organization and Writing Clarity

While I did appreciate the breakdown of what composes cells (organelles) prior to their functions, I think that something to consider moving is the origin of cells to the beginning of the article. Not only does this follow a more sequential chain of events, but where this section is now, at the end of the article< makes it seem like an after thought.

Images and Media

All of the images appear to follow wikipedias copyright rules as each is linked to a subsequent article. While the ones represent are helpful to enhancing the learning process of the reader, I feel that more images could have been utilized for the cellular processes section, as I feel it is easier to comprehend a process when you can visually look at each of the steps sequentially.

Talk Page Discussion

This article is rated a C by Wikipedia but it is also a "vital article" for science. Additionally, I liked how it said it had initially been on the "Natural sciences good articles" list but is not longer on there because I think that speaks to the lack of up-to-date sources that have aged the article past being completely relevant. On the to-do list, there are plenty of discussion questions or suggestions for the WikiProject. Each has been answered with a sub-bullet point. As it relates to what we discussed in class, it seems just to be much more general with more focus on what a cell is as opposed to what do cells do.

Overall Impressions

Overall i thought this article did a great job at covering the surface level of Cell Biology. I felt like there wasn't consistent depth of analysis throughout the article, and I would have liked to have seen recent sources for the information given, as well as images for the cellular processes. I think this is a good jumping off point into the world of cell biology, but I would be hesitant to use this as a more sophisticated, upper level source for a project or just knowledge of the topic.