User:Lberkowicz/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.


 * Prokaryotic riboflavin biosynthesis protein
 * This protein is an important enzyme in biosynthesis, and the bifunctional characteristic of it's structure is incredibly interesting. While one part of the enzyme is relatively homologous to the corresponding monofunctional eukaryotic enzyme, the other part differs greatly. This enzyme could easily be something that could be covered in a class like Prokaryotic Processes, so adding more information about the protein and the reactions it takes part in.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * The Lead does contain an introductory sentence that is concise, but it does not offer much information in terms of the topic itself. The only information it includes is that it is a bifunctional protein found in bacteria. The Lead does not contain a brief description of the article's major sections, most likely due to the lack of actual sections. The Lead does not include information that is not present in the article.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * The article's content is relevant to the topic because it describes the general purpose of the protein and the comparison to similar eukaryotic proteins. However, more detailed content about the structure of the protein and the reactions it catalyzes should be present in the article. This content was last updated on Mar. 28, 2020, and it was first uploaded in 2011.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions
 * This article does seem neutral because there are only facts stated that do not seem to draw any conclusions based on research done. There does not seem to be a bias toward any side, and there are no viewpoints that are over- or under-represented.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * The facts are backed up by reliable research papers that seem to be directly related to the topic. The sources are somewhat outdated because they are from 2003 and 2007. The links do work in the article.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * The article is well-written and concise with each fact presented. There are no obvious grammatical or spelling errors, and the article is well organized. The facts presented flow well together, and there are no randomly inserted facts.


 * 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
 * There is one image that shows the protein structure of this enzyme. The caption gives a detailed description of the image and clearly explains how it is connected to the topic. The image does seem to adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations because the image has an obviously stated source.


 * 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
 * There are no conversations going on behind the scenes about this topic. This article is part of the WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology. It is rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale and Low-Importance in the importance scale. This topic has not been discussed in class.


 * 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
 * This article needs a lot of information to be added for it to be a better quality article. It's strengths are the concise descriptions of the general processes the protein is involved in, but it can be greatly improved by going into detail. It is currently very underdeveloped because of this fact.


 * 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: