User:Lilywestphal1/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: Bacteroides
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because we are investigating unknown gut bacteria found in coyote feces. Bacteroides make up a majority of the mammalian microbiome.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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

Yes the content of the article is relevant and up-to-date. I don't know enough about Bacteroides to know if there is information missing. It does seem like a sparse article though.


 * 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

Yes the article is neutral. They presented all the information as unbiased fact.


 * 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
 * Yes there are 23 references and they are functional, current, and thorough.


 * 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
 * There are a few grammar errors but the article is easy to read. The article is broken down into sections but I think it could be a little more concise.


 * 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 an image with a clear caption. The image does adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. I think there could be more imagery.


 * 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

This article is rated C-Class and is a part of the WikiProject Microbiology. There is discussion about obligate anaerobes and how they are not aerotolerant organisms. There is also a conversation about a new enzyme from Nature Journal. Wikipedia discusses the topics in very minimal language. In class we try to expand our understanding by describing things is detail. Wikipedia conversation assumes a certain level of knowledge about the topic at hand is known.


 * 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 has been ranked Highly Important. There is a strong skeletal framework but the article could use some organizational help. It also needs more information and more pictures and to be fact checked with a fine comb. It is definitely underdeveloped.


 * 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: