User:Lrumph/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: CapZ
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * It is related to information I just learned in my cell biology class that I want to understand better.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * There is no leading statement.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?\
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Does not exist

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The sections need more biochemical mechanisms to describe how CapZ works. The cardiac section either needs more information or should not exist as a separate section.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * CapZ effect on cardiac health
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The cardiac health section uses a primary source (an experiment) which could be biased or not refutable.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * More sources could be used as I feel like there is more information than what is provided on the page.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes its easy to understand and presents the topic in a simple way where minimal previous knowledge would be needed.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It is broken down but I think the order of the sections should be altered and that some major sections should be subsections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * It has one picture but definitely needs more to show its functioning. The picture that is provided does not relate to any information given on the page.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Very little conversation, only updates from the original author.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Stub-Class in Molecular and Cell Biology
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Very similar to how it was discussed in class. It highlights a few new facts.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Poor
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It provides an article to an important regulatory molecule in the cytoskeleton system which is important to proper cell function.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * It definitely needs more information and more detailed information. The picture used was not very helpful to creating a better understanding of what CapZ is.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Poorly - underdeveloped

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: