User:Longoria.jared/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating the article titled, "Epigenetics of anxiety and stress-related disorders".

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because it appeared to be the most interesting from the list presented after typing, "Epigenetics", into the search bar. This article matters because it is relevant to the course and is also a developing science with considerable impact on our understanding of human biology and psychology. My preliminary impression of this article was that it is well constructed.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead section:

I believe that this article has a concise introductory statement that informs the reader of the topics that will be discussed as well as their relevance.

Content:

The content presented in this article is sufficiently up-to-date and balances it's coverage of the topic's most important aspects.

Tone and Balance:

The article maintains a neutral tone throughout as well as successfully balancing the collected information without neglecting a particular aspect.

Sources and References:

All the sources cited in this article appear to be functional, reliable, and up-to-date.

Organization and writing quality:

The article is organized and clear to understand. There does not appear to be any errors in syntax or structure.

Images and Media:

The article includes many images that assist the reader. These images are well-captioned, relevant, and appear to adhere to the copyright regulations. However, I do believe that more of the images could be shown inherently on the page rather than requiring the reader to hover over a hyperlinked word/phrase within the text. I think it would help break up the text and make the article overall more "visually appealing".

Talk page discussion:

There is no conversation going on for this article but there is a note describing how this article should be improved. This article is of interest to four WikiProjects that all rate this article as C-class/Low-importance. The note discusses the need for a practical connection of the information to medical science which I do not believe is the goal of this class. I would say the primary goal is to explain the mechanisms of epigenetics while mentioning practical applications or examples as a way to gain a greater understanding of the science.

Overall impressions:

I would describe the article's overall status as above average. Obviously I'm not only being introduced to the subject in this undergraduate course but I'm also starting to understand the criteria for what makes a "good" Wikipedia article. The article appears to clearly explain the mentioned topics using reliable sources for information. I discussed previously how I would edit the structure of the article, primarily it's use of images, to make it more visually appealing. It was also mentioned in the talk page how the article essentially lacks depth which I attributed to the ever-changing nature of this particular subject and the expectation that this page would supply a overview of the topics listed in the introductory statement. I did not expect this article to include every detail of every aspect with exhaustive information. This makes me wonder the degree of content I should expect when evaluating future articles. The article is not complete by any means but it is well-developed and provides a strong base for future developments.