User:Neo7227/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Astrology and astronomy

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

The article that I chose to evaluate is titled Astrology and Astronomy, and I chose this article because it significantly relates to our course (history of science to Newton), and it mentions a few notable figures in astrology that we have discussed in class. Some of these notable individuals that were mentioned are Aristotle, Ptolemy, and Eudoxus. This article matters because it mentions the distinction between astrology and astronomy, and the author seems to make the point that astrology is more of a pseudoscience and astronomy is truly scientific and applies to the universe. My preliminary impression of this article was positive and I enjoyed reading through it, because although it was short, it mentioned facts about astronomy that we have learned in class.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The article is titled Astrology and Astronomy, and the author begins the article with a brief history of science. They mention the roots of astronomy and astrology, but the major goal of this article seems to be to make a clear distinction between the nature of astrology vs. astronomy. It seems that everything is relevant to the article topic, and I wasn't distracted by any unnecessary information. The information is up to date, and for the purpose of this article I would not add any more information to it. Some things that could be improved with this article could be a more detailed explanation to why the author feels the need to make the difference between astrology and astronomy clearer, but their reasoning in the article itself makes sense. The author points out that astrology focuses more on spirituality and belief, rather than actual evidence using the scientific method. The author highlights that astrology is based on pseudoscience, and the fact that astrology is very different from true astronomy. The author's tone is definitely biased towards astrology, and I support the author's view because astronomy utilizes precise calculations and factual evidence, and doesn't try to explain vague feelings by using the stars and planets, but both viewpoints are sufficiently represented. The sources used by the author for this article are relevant and the links work. The sources that are used are supportive of both viewpoints and supply the article with good source material and evidence, and the author used a diverse array of sources in creating this article. Each fact seems to be supported with a reliable reference, and the author does a good job of imbedding links without disrupting the flow of the article. In the talk page, there are quite a few conversations that include constructive criticism, and the author seems to have made adjustments to their original article in response to the comments by readers.