User:Lauraellis4/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Giraffe

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I didn't want to start one websites for our project yet so I picked Giraffes because they're my favorite animals! My first impression was that it was a very developed page, especially compared to some of the deep sea organisms I had looked at recently. I loved all the visuals and how it was broken up.

Evaluate the article
Lead section - Clearly described in the introductory sentence and had good information. It didn't really preview the sections below but it had relevant information despite being a bit lengthy.

Content - It seems fairly up to date; the last dated information was from 2019 but I'm not sure if more conversation status information has come out since then to use. It has lots of relevant information but does not talk about one of Wikipedia's equity gaps since I don't think that's relevant to the topic.

Tone and Balance - I didn't pick up on any biases in the article. Most was just describing facts and then towards the end it added in cultural significance to humans, conversation status and human exploitation and captivity but it was all based in fact and not arguing to stop or continue.

Sources and References - There are recent sources from 2022 and 2021 as well as many older sources from the late 1900s. The links did work for me and there were a variety of authors listed. There were some repeat authors but still enough diversity in sources, since there were 146 sources listed.

Organization and writing quality - I really liked the writing and organization of the article and how it started broad and went into technical more specific sections like body parts and its evolutionary history. I do feel like the conservation status could be more important rather than the last section in the article but I'm sure it's one of the newer sections that gets edited frequently while the above sections have more direct relevance to what giraffes are and where they came from.

Images and media - There's a great use of images that adds to the content being discussed and all have captions to support what they are showing and contributing.

Talk page discussion - It is rated as a level 4 article and there are some good, recent conversations happening in reference to it. One is talking about adding a mythology section while there others are discussing improvements to information already posted. It seems they concluded their conversations by fixing the mistakes and they are updated now on the page.

Overall impressions - Overall, this seems like a very well developed article and I hope we are able to get our deep-sea organisms closer to this level. It is strong in that there are a lot of different relevant sections that go in depth, while citing where every piece of information comes from. I think it is pretty complete and well-developed. However, an area that could be improved would be to get a more recent update on the conservation status since maybe something has changed since 2019 and that's one of the few things that would need to keep being updated on this page.