User:Nh92/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: Parathyroid hormone receptor (link: Parathyroid hormone receptor)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because the topic was unfamiliar to me, but looked interesting.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. The lead doesn't include a description for the major sections of the article. The lead doesn't contain information that isn't present in the article. The lead is concise, but doesn't contain much substance at all.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article has roughly two lines of content related to the topic. The content seems to be up-to-date. There is a lot of room for improvement as there is little to no content. This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps nor does it relate to a historically underrepresented population/ topic.


 * 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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is neutral. There aren't any claims that appear to be heavily biased towards a particular position. There isn't much content to say it was over or underrepresented. The article doesn't attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The facts are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information. And the sources are thorough. The sources are not current, there aren't any sources from the last 10 years. The sources do not seem to be from a diverse spectrum of authors. The links work.


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well-written. The article does not have any grammatical or spelling errors. The article is not well-organized.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article does not include any images.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There are no conversations going on in the talk page. This article is stub-class and a low-importance article. It is part of the Molecular and Cell Biology WikiProject. I don't think this topic was discussed in any of my Biochemistry classes.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article is stub-class and a low-importance article. The article doesn't really have any strengths. The article can be greatly improved. There needs to be sections and sub-sections. And a lot more content needs to be added to fully develop the article. The article is not fully completely, it is very poorly developed.


 * 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?

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: