User:Maryedaviss/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: Vertebral column
 * I chose to evaluate this article because it seemed to be an article in animal anatomy that seemed to be missing information on animals besides humans. Is is also a C-class article, indicating that it could use some work.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
This article's lead is clear and seems to state the article's topic well, but it could use some more information about how vertebral columns vary among vertebrates, or at least mention that there is great variation besides humans. The lead seems to be lacking in briefly stating the major sections of the paper. It doesn't touch on the function of the vertebral column, the components, or the clinical importance. It would benefit from having a short portion in which it mentions the major sections of the article. The lead mentions that the human vertebral column is the most frequently studied, which I don't believe is a necessary or important thing to mention in that specific section. However, it seems well written and gives a good description in a short space.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
The article's content seems relevant and mostly up to date, however, as pointed out in the talk section of this paper, the information on the coccyx may not be the most correct description. I feel as though this article is greatly lacking in information on animals besides humans. There is only one small section to designate all non-human animals to, and as stated in the beginning of the paper, there are about 50,000 species with vertebral columns. There also seems to be a large emphasis on the physiology of the vertebrae, and less on the importance and function of the vertebrae.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the article is very neutral and seems very science focused. The only bias that seems to be present here is one towards the human medical field. All other groups are underrepresented. The article doesn't seem to have any persuasive themes.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
The facts in the article seem well backed, and the sources seem to be reputable. Some sources are not current, but the article seems to represent old and new sources well. There is some information that could be better represented by new literature. There could be more references to literature. Some sections don't have a clear citation to a certain source.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
Overall, the article seems well written and organized. It is overall easy to read and follow. The organization is well done and makes sense.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
Overall, images seem well used, but seem to be lacking in some sections in which they could be helpful. Pictures are used well in the shape section. Pictures used are clear and well captioned.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page doesn't have a huge amount of traffic, but overall, the information in the talk page are editors asking questions to one another and posting their own edits for approval of others and questions. This topic differs in this article by the fact that it focuses almost completely on human anatomy. This article is related C-class and of vital importance. It is part of several wiki-projects, such as animal anatomy, paleontology, etc.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
Overall, the article is well written and is clear and easy to understand, an is well organized. It is a good base for further information. It is lacking in information. There are major sections that are under developed, and considering its anatomical importance to all vertebrates, it is important that information is well represented. This article could be improved by having more information for other animals, and including more about clinical and evolutionary significance. This article also could benefit from a discussion on the evolution of the spinal column.

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: