User:Maria Massaro/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Phytochemistry

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it pertain directly to my current interests as a scientist. In my literature review, I outline the basis of phytochemistry within a certain plant. This plant produces phytochemicals that are a base component of chemotherapy drugs, the production of which can be induced by other phytohormones. Phytochemistry provides an important insight into the use of medicinal plants in the development and application of various products, including pharmaceuticals. Upon reading this article, it lacks a lot of information. It was very general and not descriptive.

Evaluate the article
The lead of this article is concise. The introductory statement accurately and efficiently describes the topic of the article without much detail. The lead's description of the major sections are made in one sentence, mostly. The lead contains information that does not receive elaboration in the rest of the article. It refers to the biosynthesis of phytochemicals but only covers techniques used to complete this. There is a conciseness to the lead that is beneficial to the understanding of the topic of the article.

The article's content is relevant to the topic but, from my knowledge, is not up to date with the information available. There is missing content on the biosynthesis and the techniques used could be elaborated on. Additionally, the description of the classes of phytochemicals can be elaborated on. Being scientific, the article does not refer to any information regarding the equity gap.

The article comes from a neutral point of view, without leaning towards a specific source. There are no points or positions that seem to be heavily taken in this article. There is no evidence of certain views being over or under represented.

There is a tag on the article for relying too heavily on primary sources. The sources are not relatively current and do not cover the full scope of the topic. There are very specific sources that seem to relate only to the visuals rather than the text. Most of the sources are from academic journals. Additionally, the content is diverse in authors. The links still work to the sources.

The organization of the article is well done. The writing is concise and easy to follow, provided links where certain terms may need them. There are no grammatical or spelling errors. The sections of the article are few. I would have placed the classifications section before the techniques section.

The article's imagery is informational. The images provide an example of plants containing the various types of phytochemicals and provide a reference of the chemical structure as well. These provide an enhancement to the knowledge of the article. The figures are captioned well, describing the plant and the use of the phytochemical. The structures are labelled similarly. The images are all different sizes and lined up next to each other. I think that this takes away from the text because it seems that most of the article is taken up by visuals.

It looks as if the talk page hasn't been touched in years. There are 3 responses total and all coming from around 2006-07. The article is considered top, high, and mid importance by the plants, biology, and chemistry WikiProjects respectively. It is a C-Class article.

The overall status of this page is decent. The article is concise and easy to read for those not a part of the discipline. The neutral tone and use of academic articles are strengths as well. The article could use more detail and relevant information on the topic, as it lacks in content. The visuals can be rearranged to better ease the eye. Overall, I would say that this page is underdeveloped based on the available information.