User:MeganBodine/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.

Greater blue-ringed octopus

I have chosen this article because it is one of the smaller most potent sea creatures in the entire planet. I feel that is was under represented so I want to provide the information this little octopus deserves.


 * Name of article: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

It does include an introductory sentence that clearly describes the articles topic and I crafted brief descriptions of the articles major sections. I have a well developed draft in the making already. I have at least doubled the content of the original article and fully intend to add more information as well. There is little information presented about the life cycle as well which is what i plan on elaborating in. The lead is short and concise.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * The articles content is relevant to the topic and as up to date as I could find. There was content that was not previously explained so it did not make sense, I have already elaborated topics for better understanding.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is nuetral, there is no bias or opinion present. There are topics under presented, such as the "biology" section and "danger" section. I plan on renaming so it is a little more clear on the content being provided. There is no persuasion present. Most of the information is underrepresented and needs clarification and grammatical adjustments.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Yes the facts are backed up by decent sources, some of which i used myself. The sources are thorough but I personally think the original author could have elaborated more on a lot of information. The links work but I plan to incorporate mine with the authors and tidy them up, they seem disorganized.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is not well written, but it is easy to read. The author used terms like "coat" to describe the octopus' skin which did not make sense. There is terminology that i plan on fixing for more concise information. The article does have grammatical errors and in my personal opinion not well organized.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding question:

The article does contain images that help with understanding but there is mainly just pictures of the octopus itself.. no maps, pictures of body parts, toxins, etc. The images are well captioned, and follow copyright rules. The images are not that aesthetically pleasing, no.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

Guiding questions could include what makes this invertebrate one of the most dangerous in the sea, how coloration correlates with its potent venom.

The article is does not appear to be rated but it is not a part of any wiki projects either. This wikipedia page seems relatively unorganized and doesnt represent itself the way we discussed in class. Overall, this wiki page needs copious amounts of work and organization.


 * 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
 * Overall, the article is somewhat informative however it could use a lot more information. I feel that with a little more organization and elaboration on most topics it would be a much better article. Overall, I would say the completeness of this article is about 6/10.. kind of like a first rough draft kind of page.


 * 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: