User:Msantos2/sandbox

Article evaluation
The article I chose to evaluate is Vulture.

Overall, I think this was a really good article in terms of the substance/context that was provided; however, the addition of more important information about vulture could greatly improve it. All the information that was provided was relevant to the topic. There were not any distractions or information just thrown in there that did not relate. The article remained neutral, not showing any biases. Furthermore, there were not any viewpoints that were overrepresented or underrepresented. In fact, there were not any viewpoints presented at all. The article stuck to only providing facts on vultures. I think the article could do a better job with citing sources and providing references. I did catch that there is one part where someone suggested that a citation is needed. I checked out the first three links and they do work and while the first two a reliable sources (an academic paper and a cultural encyclopedia), the third link is to a website that may not be too reliable. The sources were neutral though. The sources range from 2003 through 2016 which I think is still pretty relevant and good to use. The article is part of WikiProject Birds. It is rated as High in terms of importance and C in terms of quality meaning it needs more content and references. Some of the conversations being had on the Talk page include translating into a different language, whether the list of vultures is necessary, links to other facts that may or may not be added, etc. The information on vultures provided in this article is very vague compared to how we talk about them in class. One thing to note is that this article talks about vultures in general whereas we focus on African vultures. Another difference is that we go more into detail about the role they play in our environment and the impacts of their presence or lack of.