User:Lindsaybean/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: Damselfly
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article on Damselflies because it will give me background information on the vulnerable species, Orangeblack Hawaiian Damselfly. This article also shows me what it takes to make a good Wikipedia article and give me a better understanding on what information is important versus too detailed.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

After reading this article, I would have to say that the first sentence doesn't fully describe what was all going to be discussed about in this article. The first sentence offered some background information on the species which leads into the first paragraph that talks about the main topics that are discussed later in the article. Within the introduction paragraph, it describes all the important information, or topics, that were later discussed in the article. The introduction paragraph does not include any topics or ideas that weren't included in the article. Everything that was listed was talked about throughout the article. Since I am creating a page for the Orangeblack Hawaiian Damselfly, this article doesn't seem too overly detailed as it provides me with information I could include or talk about in my article, but for someone who is just looking up the species, might find this article to be too wordy or over detailed.


 * 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

Everything that was discussed about in the article was very relevant to the topic and provided a lot of background information about the species. I would say the information is up to date as the last person to have edited the article happened on January 21, 2020. After reading this article, I would say that all the information that was discussed about belonged in the paper and I didn't notice any material or information that seemed to be missing from the article.


 * 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

The article is completely neutral as it discusses and gives information about a species. There seems to be no opinion or biased information towards one side that has been discussed in this article. There are some subtopics that aren't talked about as much as others or contain as much information, but those sections that seem light on the information side contain enough facts and ideas to summarize the subtopic. At the end of the article, I didn't feel like the authors were trying to persuade me to think one way or another about the topic discussed in this article.


 * 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

When looking at the given facts within each subtopic, it seems to me that everything that seemed important or factual was cited by a secondary source which was listed at the bottom of the article under references. Under the references section of this article, I would say that the selection that was made was very thorough based on the fact that there are 66 sources listed from background information of Damselflies to a poem about Damselflies. The sources listed on the article seem to be current because most of the sources date within the past 20 years while there are a few sources from the late 1800's and 1900's. Clicking on a few random links, they seem to work by pulling me over to the website that was linked with the source.


 * 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

After reading the article, I would say it is very well-written as the topics seem to flow together and the information throughout the article is very clear and easy to understand. I didn't notice any grammar mistakes or spelling errors throughout the article. I would say that the article is very well made meaning that the subtopics are broken up effectively into their subcategories which summarize the main topic talked about in this article.


 * 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

At the beginning of the article, it contains a common picture of a Damselfly which makes it easier for the reader to understand what they are reading about. There are also images laid all throughout the article with very detailed descriptions that give the reader more background information on what they are reading about and what is happening within the imagine. From my understanding, it seems to me that every picture that is included in this article are following the copyright regulations of Wikipedia. There is an imagine for about every single topic or subtopic talked about in this article which makes it fun for the reader to read compared to just a ton of words laid out on the screen. The multiple images add color and variation to the article.


 * 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 about Damselflies is basically giving us the main or background information that is important for this species. There are multiple different kinds of species that make up the genus containing Damselflies but this article gives us the basic information needed to understand what is special to this particular species. This article does not appear to have any connection with a WikiProject. In Conservation Biology, we didn't necessarily talk about Damselflies as a topic in general, but there are some species of Damselflies that are endangered, critically endangered, or vulnerable that need more information about them online. This is where the concept of Conservation Biology as a class relates to the topic of Damselflies.


 * 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

After reading this article, I would say that the status of this article is not complete or finished. I say this because as time goes on, new information is discovered about Damselflies that will need to be added to this article. The articles strengths, in my opinion, is definitely on the subtopics of Biology, Classification, and General Description because all three of these subtopics are explained with great facts and details while also being backed up by secondary sources. The areas this article needs improvement is definitely in the subtopic of Conservation because there could be more information that could be added to this section to help us better understand what we need to do to help this species stay alive. After reading the whole article, I would have to say that the article is very developed in both aspects of the main topic and subtopics being described very well with facts and secondary sources.


 * 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: