User:Nellie.roberts/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: Antibiotic misuse
 * Antibiotic misuse has been a common topic in many science-related courses throughout previous years. I have learned about it in multiple undergraduate classes, and I heard talk of it before then, as well.  I was interested to read more about the subject and see if there are any possible alternatives to specific misuses of antibiotics.

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead includes a brief description of what antibiotic resistance is and states that it has been commonly misused in recent years.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No - it does not include very much information at all.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is very brief. However, there are only two sentences, and the second one is very long which makes it somewhat difficult to follow.

Lead evaluation
I thought the first sentence of the lead did a good job at briefly introducing the topic. However, the second sentence seemed a little too wordy in my opinion.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the article includes information on the background of the topic and why it is an issue.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The information seems correct compared to what I have learned thus far. However, the most recent citation I saw was from 2017, so I think newer information should be included.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * More research would need to be done to find missing content, but I think all the information present makes sense and goes along with the subject at hand.

Content evaluation
I think the content present is good. However, I also think that newer information could be added that could make the page more up-to-date. Newer research has been done since 2017, so there could be key discoveries that are missing from the article if this newer information is not included.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article seems fairly neutral in just presenting the facts.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The writer does not make and personal remarks / biases/
 * 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?
 * Yes - I think the facts presented lead to the fact that antibiotic misuse is a major problem.

Tone and balance evaluation
I think the writer did a good job at not trying to come to conclusions on their own by combining citations and claiming that one led to another / correlated. It does seem as if the writer is trying to persuade the reader somewhat that antibiotic misuse is a problem, but I think that is because it is a legitimate concern, and the writer only does so by presenting facts. I don't think they are trying to be persuasive, but that is just how the research has been conducted.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No
 * Are the sources current?
 * No
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
I think the sources present are good, and the links I clicked worked. However, there is definitely more information that could be included on the topic considering the most recent citation was from 2017.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * For the most part
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * None that I found
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Organization evaluation
Overall, I thought the organization of the article was good. I did not find any major grammatical errors, and it was broken down well.

Images and Media
Guiding questions:


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Somewhat
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I think so
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

Images and media evaluation
All images are off to the right of certain sections. However, although it is nice to have the images, I don't think they add much to the article itself. Two of the three are posters, which are small with writing on them, and I don't think they draw attention or that people would be inclined to pay much attention to them.

Checking the talk page
Guiding questions:


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There isn't much talk about the article going on right now. Similarly to the citations, the most recent comment I saw was from 2017.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated as C-class on the quality scale and of High-Importance on the importance scale.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I don't think the article went in to nearly as much detail as what I have discussed in previous classes. It could definitely be improved.

Talk page evaluation
I think the article needs more attention. Considering the talk page hasn't been active since 2017, it definitely needs to be updated.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Not up to date
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Explains things in fairly simple terms so most people can understand.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article needs newer information and more people editing it / more frequently.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I think the article has good information, but I think it is underdeveloped. There is much more information available to be added to the page.

Overall evaluation
Overall, I thought the article was good. However, it could definitely stand to be improved upon. There are many more topics that can be discussed in detail related to antibiotic misuse. It just seems to have been neglected over the past couple of years.

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:Antibiotic misuse