User:Mnaas2016/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: Cellular senescence
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this topic because cellular senescence is a process that I believe is an underappreciated and important part of cell biology.

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
The first sentence begins with the definition of cellular senescence. In that aspect, it gives a short and clear idea of the article. The introduction paragraph does not delve into any of the subsections and instead goes into more of a general history behind the topic. I think the lead is lacking some details or structure about cellular senescence and could go into more broad topics that would tie in with later sections.

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
Under the "Role of telomeres" subsection, I think that some of the content there is off-topic. I would expect more information about telomeres and less information on cloning. The content appears to be up-to-date but some things could be changed or updated. I think everything in the article is pretty much relevant. Perhaps more information on cell senescence on mammalian diseases is needed and the subsection itself could be fleshed out a little.

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
The article appears to be neutral, I do not see any apparent biases. Although, cloning seems to be brought up out of nowhere. There does seem to be an emphasis on senescence cells concerning the immune system. I do not think the article is trying to push me to look at one position or another, in this aspect it is neutral.

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
I don't think the article is fully backed up by secondary sources. There appear to be some claims without any source to back it up. The sources that are present do pertain to the topic and seem to be good secondary sources. Most of the sources are roughly four to nine years old. Very few are within one to two years of the current year. More updated sources could be added. The links that are there do work.

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
For the most part the article clear and easy to read. I found some sentences could be rewritten to be a little better. I also did notice a good amount of grammatical errors. Spelling wise, I noticed tumor being spelling as "tumour", but it could be a different spelling depending on the country. I think the organization is okay, more defined sections would help with the flow.

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
The image present adds to the topic. The picture has captions that explain exactly what the images are showing, which elevates the picture's message. The picture, however, does not adhere to Wikipedia's copyright. The images are visually friendly and are fine to look at.

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
There is not much going on in the talk page. The original author is talking about what he or she intended to do with the article. I only saw one other person on the talk page talking about some improvements that could be made. The article is C rated and is a part of the Molecular and Cell Biology, Biology, and Ageing and Culture WikiProjects.

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, I think the article is a good starting point to build on for more thorough information. It does provide some good content on certain topics that are supported by good secondary sources. Some aspects could use a little more information or more sources. Grammar needs some improvement at first sight. The article is underdeveloped, it has the bones and some other connective tissue, but it could use some muscle and nerves.

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: Talk:Cellular senescence