User:Logan Picunko/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Euoplocephalus

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am personally interested in paleontology and dinosaurs in particular. I felt that my prior experience with paleontology and writing would allow me to lend a critical eye to the article.

Evaluate the article
This articicle as a whole is very well put together. Being that Paleontology is a well regulated, recorded, and scrupulous field, there's little doubt in my mind that the sources provided are innacurate. Names, dates, and locations are provided throughout the article and no speculative claims are passed on as fact. The main areas I can see needing improvement are the top of the article and the description of the animal. These two sections have odd sentence structure and do not proceed in a linear, easy to follow fashion. One such example is the constant use of and in the physical description of the creature, jumping back and forth between different parts of the body. There is also an odd section in which discusses the authenticity of Euoplocephalus fossils and how scientists have recently been removing some fossils due to a lack of authenticity. There isn't an attached source or anything to reinforce this claim, which makes it difficult to verify. There is also a term used in the "Senses and Airflow" section called "Mammal-like treatment that has been flagged as needing further clarification. Furthermore, in the description section there are a number of advanced, Latin terms used to describe the anatomy of the animal. This termonology is used in order to understand what parts of the animal one is talking about and therefore requires some prior research, however some of these terms could use links or further explanation in order to make it more accessable to general audiences.

This article is apart of WikiProjects Dinosaurs and has extensive discussions between users about the validity and accuracy of each of the sources. The way the editors discuss the article is a bit more casual than how it would be discussed in class. I do think, however, that the individuals editing and expanding upon this article are knowledgable and passionate about the topic.