User:Metroidm/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: (Saccopharyngiforms)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because it is of a particular species of aquatic animal that I like and have a high amount of interest in.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It does.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? This is a short article so no it does not nor does it need to.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Everything in the article is presented briefly in the lead.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise and gives the basic information of the species.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Everything is relevant and on topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Latest reference was from 2018.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? From what I can tell everything is relevant

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are not
 * 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

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all are scholarly sources
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they go into heavy detail on the taxonomy of the eel species and other info about them.
 * Are the sources current? Most are.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links that have a hyperlink work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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? Not that I could tell.
 * 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


 * 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


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? That the article needs more information.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as a "Start Mid" article and is group into the "Wikiproject Fish" group.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It doesn't really differ.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Start Mid
 * What are the article's strengths? Very short and to the point.
 * How can the article be improved? More information should be gathered if it can be found.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I'd say it feels a bit lacking but considering the topic it's hard to find scholarly sources to bolster the article.

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: