User:Meaganvanpelt/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: Mammalogy
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I currently am taking multiple zoology classes and have come to find myself interested specifically in mammals. Additionally, I have always loved working on the mammal research projects more than ornithology or herpetology projects.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The introductory sentence briefly defines mammalogy and then goes one to describe what a mammal is. Additionally, the article includes the other names for the study of mammalogy and the several branches that go off of it. There is no irrelevant information stated in the introduction. It is short and to the point.


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

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content includes, research purposes, mammalogist, history and journals to further the reader's curiosity. The article was last upated july 14, 2020.


 * 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? No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article I felt was neutral, there was no bias towards any other sort of study or a certain type of mammalogy. Each viewpoint is well represented.


 * 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? No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References
The sources are easily accessible and all the links work. Also, the sources are relevant to the claims they are supporting.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yep

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is super short and concise. They did not need to go into much depth but provided resources for the reader to do so.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * 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? yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

There is one picture of a Siberian tiger, captioned Siberian tiger. Also the chart is relevant and resourceful.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes
 * 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

I do not know of anyone talking about this topic other than mammalogists. Possibly in the realm of conservation, they could consult mammalogists. It is rated to read like a high school essay and a part of wikiprojects. I also saw it is a level 5 vital article.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article could use some work but has a nice start. This gives a nice, concise overview of the topic of mammalogy. I was definitely hoping for more information about job opportunities and the different types of responsibilities a mammalogist would have.


 * 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?

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: