User:Kratinaha/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Auxin

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Auxin is a phytohormone which is relevant to many processes within plants and therefore of big interest to botanists and potentially chemical ecologists. The article on it seems long and takes up several effects of auxin.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section


 * does have a concise introductory sentence
 * does not summarize the main sections
 * not all information from the lead section is    elaborated on in the main article
 * the lead focuses mainly on the discovery of auxin    and hardly mentions its effects

Content


 * is relevant
 * most sources are from the past 15 years, but that    doesn't have to mean that it's up to date
 * to me it is hard to tell if something is missing
 * the article does not deal with equity gaps

Tone and Balance


 * in the section about Peter Boysen Jensen the    article states "These results were fundamental for further work on     the auxin theory of tropisms." without citing a source     which makes the use of the strong word "fundamental"     questionable
 * otherwise, the article does not seem to try to    convince the reader of an opinion

Sources and References


 * some sections, like the one called    "Organization of the plant" or "Effects" have very few     references
 * mostly academic journals used as sources,    sometimes very relevant papers like Science and Nature
 * most sources are from within the last 15 years

Organization and writing quality


 * the sections "Hormonal activity" and    "Effects" could be combined
 * in the section "Auxin transport and the    uneven distribution of auxin", 'Green fluorescent protein' is written     in all caps for no apparent reason

Images and Media


 * image captioned as "Auxin diffuses    along..." could be described more thoroughly to make the smaller     image within it more understandable
 * it would be helpful to add an image illustrating    apical dominance
 * images adhere to copyright regulations

Talk page discussion


 * page only has a handful of threads, most of which    are not being discussed
 * hints to missing information
 * on thread criticizing the quality of a source
 * makes it seem like the article is not being worked on very much, which is not the ideal we discussed in class

Overall impressions


 * article seems to cover some topics rather    thoroughly, while others are being left out
 * more images would be helpful
 * it should be further developed