User:Mjsalnic/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: (Agalychnis callidryas)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: The article describes a species I am working on, this generated my curiosity about the information that is accessible to the public in Wikipedia. I wanted to know how detailed, accurate and current is the information in the wiki page of this species

Lead
The introductory sentence concisely describes the article topic

The Lead includes the brief description and contain all of the sections presented in the article

The Lead is concise, but it can be structured differently, the "captivity" fact is not relevant in the first description paragraph

Content
The content is relevant to the topic. However, it is not completely up-to-date and it can be more detailed. The information is quite vague in some sections and not all of the statements have references, mainly in the reproduction section.

Tone and Balance
Overall, the article is neutral. The reproduction section initiates with a sentence that may be different without saying "It has been proven that...". The facts about the reproduction of the species can be addressed showing all of the facts that are related to mating selection, without highlighting the body size. And that claim of the body size needs another reference. The reference used is a paper about tremulation display as aggressive signal and vibrational signaling, which only applies for the last sentence of the paragraph.

Sources and References
Overall, the article needs more references. There are entire paragraphs without citations. The information about phenotypic plasticity might be updated and reorganized. I think it would be better to mention that as an "Environmentally-Cued Hatching" and adds more facts related to that from updated literature. .

The links work well.

Organization

 * The organization is fine. The article has a good starting point in terms of structure, but sections might be more develop adding information, having a section just for one sentence it does not seems useful, that information could fit in another section

Images and Media
Images can be updated, though current images are good. Adding more images might be a good idea. Images captions are good, short and with relevant information. The images complied the copyright regulations

Checking the talk page
The conversations are basically questions about eye color in these frogs or utility of the frogs plus one link-update notice. The talk page is short for this topic

Overall impressions
Overall the article gives a brief overview of the species and mentions relevant facts about biology and behavior.

The strengths are the organization, and the additional topics addressed in the article. The article can be improved by adding updated information and my using primary literature about some of the topics. It needs more references.

The article mention relevant topics related to the species, it can be more developed and reorganized.

Overall evaluation
The article presents relevant information, but it needs citations in some parts of the text. Is a good place to find general information of the species