User:LE4rSt0966/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Epigenetics

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Epigenetics was a topic recently featured in the course, and given its importance and how fickle it can be due to the organism's environment, it seemed apt to feature this article in my analysis.

Evaluate the article
Lead section: The lead section is very concise, summarizing the subject in a simple sentence and giving a well rounded introduction to the topic for the rest of the article. There however is not much mention of the subtopics that are mentioned later in the article, besides a brief overview of some mechanisms and provides an example to how epigenetics plays a part in development.

Content: The content all was under the umbrella topic, going into extensive detail about the subject. The content did seem up to date as well, with one source being cited from as recently as 2017 from my observations. All content mentioned seemed to fit under the topic and had a place in the article.

Tone and Balance: The article was neutral in tone, presenting what is known about the topic from articles and research papers. No viewpoints seemed to be favored in one way or another. Fringe arguments were brought up at the end of the article, and spoken little about, but arguably there isn't much to regard on the pseudoscience aspect of epigenetics. There is no observable attempt to sway the audience.

Sources and References:From what I saw, most statements contained references, and those I checked linked to seemingly reliable resources. From what I saw, the range of the sources stretched, and some data given was quite current. The links I checked were in working order.

Organization and Writing Quality: The article was well organized and easy to read; epigenetics is a complicated field of research and I had little difficulty understanding what the author(s) was trying to convey in the article.

Images and Media: The images very much aid in understanding of the article, with succinct descriptions beneath them.

Talk Page Discussion: There is some discourse in the "Talk" section of the article, where some students have been tasked with adding to this article, and where someone asks about why their addition was deleted. It has been rated as B-class. It does not appear to be in any WikiProjects.

Overall Impressions: This article set a good example of how an article should be written. Presents the evidence in an easy to digest way for a large audience. It covers a lot of bases regarding the topic and think it is efficient in its purpose of presenting information in an unbiased way.