User:Mp6180/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: 23andMe
 * I chose this article because these types of genetic tests are interesting to me. I would like to learn more about this test as I evaluate the article.

Lead

 * I think the introductory paragraph begins with a very general sentence, and then goes on into further detail to accurately and concisely explain what the 23 and Me service is and does. The Lead accurately explains information that will be presented in the article. It provides an interesting introduction into this service's history and products.

Content

 * The article's content is very relevant to the topic and was updated last on September 5, 2019. The only missing content I could think of is in the "accuracy concerns" section, where I feel that some data statistics would be helpful to explain the actual accuracy of the test, and the reasons for the concerns. However, this section does include updated information about the company planning to specify their result interpretations. In addition, I think that more information regarding the creation of the technology for this product would be interesting to include.

Tone and Balance

 * The article reads to be on the slightly positive side of neutral writing. I feel that the information provided generally glossed over the negatives of using this product, such as the inaccuracies; though there was a designated section for "accuracy concerns." As aforementioned, I think this information was underrepresented. I think that more data and updated information would make a positive impact on how this article fully presents this topic. In addition, I think that the content was presented to make this service appear as a company, and did not focus on the actual technology and science behind it as much as the author should have.

Sources and References

 * The sources are from reputable sources, up-to-date, and worked when I clicked on them. The sources are thorough besides my aforementioned qualm of lack of scientific information.

Organization

 * The article is clear, concise, and flows well. I did not find any errors in the writing. The sections accurately reflected information presented in the article.

Images and Media

 * The article includes one image of the test kit for the product. It is well-captioned and helps the reader to understand what the test actually entails. It adheres to Wikipedia guidelines.

Checking the talk page

 * The conversations about this article are regarding the positive tone of the article referring to it as an "ad," which I believe has been toned down since the comments were made in 2009. The talk page also has other suggestions for improvement that an author has already made. This article is part of the following WikiProjects: Medicine/Medical genetics, Companies, Genetics, California/San Francisco Bay Area, Computational Biology, Google, Computing, Apple Inc., and Genealogy. The way Wikipedia discusses this topic is more mechanical given the grammar and content of the words being said. For example, someone suggested that the article should include information about what the company's name means.

Overall impressions

 * This article provides interesting and accurate information regarding the topic presented. It describes the processes that the company has gone through with the FDA for approval, the history of its funding, reasons for peoples' qualms with the service, and many other aspects that people may be interested in when researching this topic. The article can be improved by including more data statistics about the service's accuracy and by explaining more of the scientific details behind the interpretations and development of such a product. The article is well-developed and the authors have made important changes to the content based on what I saw on its Talk page; however, there are still developments that can be made.

Optional activity

 * Link to feedback: Talk:23andMe