User:Koalakushington/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: Biomimetics
 * This article is an overview of how anatomy and biological functions of plants and animals inspire technology by mimicking their mechanics. It would be interesting to see how the authors decided to cover this broad topic and what was chosen to include or leave out.

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 is clear in describing what biomimetics is. It includes etymology, as well as a shoutout to the related field of bionics. It briefly describes what is covered in the article by previewing some examples and mentioning "at macro and nanoscales". However it does not mention the specific major sections besides listing them in the contents. One would have to scroll to see the major sections. Perhaps the lead could use more details to cover those bases, as it is very broad.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The content is definitely relevant to the topic. It first gives a brief history of biomimetics, although some of its information is more about pop culture and quotations from biophysicists. Which is fine because then the article dives into the actual inventions of biomimicry sectioned off into major categories (locomtion, structural materials, etc.). It may not be up to date however, as it barely covers the recent research in drones (inspired by the flight of bats, e.g.). However other inventions are represented that took place in the 2010s, so it is not that behind. While biomimetics may not be as informed with inequity as with other sciences, the authors still mentioned inventions from around the globe. They could have expanded certain sections on inventions about sustainability to discuss how underrepresented or low-income regions could greatly benefit from them.

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 article's tone and information are quite neutral. All information are cited and therefore credible. And no statements seem to be partisan or persuasive towards the reader. The types of biomimicry seem to cover several cultures and countries, which helps detach readers from just a Western perspective.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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: