User:Lavallep/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: Cold and heat adaptations in humans
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I am interested in how the human body adapts to changes in climate. For one reason because it begs the question what kinds of physiological impact will harsher, more abnormal changes in the weather (brought about my climate change) have on us as a species? Can we look at the historical / pre-historical past for clues? For another, somewhat unrelated reason, because I am interested in the impact that temperature - the cold in particular - has on the human body. Do we have the ability to manipulate temperature for our own well being? Can exposure to the cold be mentally and physically healing to our bodies?

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Somewhat.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise, maybe too much so.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? I believe so from scanning the dates on the references, but is that how I am supposed to tell?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? I think so? Because the topic itself is understudied?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not necessarily, but the article feels a bit skimpy.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, but I am not convinced enough information was actually written in the article.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I'm not an expert, but none that I can tell.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No images.
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Only one user posted on the talk page. His thought is very interesting but seems unlikely that there's much research.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? No assessment table.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? N/A.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I'm not sure, there is no assessment table.
 * What are the article's strengths? It acknowledges that there is little research in certain aspects of cold and heat adaptations but still includes the point.
 * How can the article be improved? More meat from the research.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped. Leaves me with wanting more information that I know is absolutely out there.

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: