User:Nickww6/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Spectroscopy

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this because it is a chemical analysis technique that I have been using for years in my undergraduate studies. I still use it in my biochemistry lab. My first impressions are that it all seems like it makes sense to somebody who doesn't previously understand it. It also packs all of the necessary info into the first two paragraphs.

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 leading paragraphs in spectroscopy do a fantastic job in describing the basics of what spectroscopy is. This information in all would be sufficient enough in explaining what spectroscopy is to a student. It also includes a range of subtopics related to the main topic. This intro does not include any details that it does not touch on later on, and is not overly detailed while still being fairly concise. The content in the article is relevant to the topic. The articles content is up to date, as this analysis method is not very recent (last edited Feb 26th, 2024). All of the content included should be included and I cannot find anything that is necessary that wasn't included. The article appears to be neutral, with no bias due to its concepts being 100% factual without any opinionated parts. In addition, there is no persuasion towards anything in the article. All facts have current citations that reflect the specific fact stated. All sources are scientific, peer reviewed articles and function correctly. Article is well written, with no grammatical errors, and good organization of sections with major sections first and more subsections below. The article includes relative well captioned images. I think this could include a light spectra image with good descriptions of how different cuvettes affect absorbance. However, this could be in a subsection that I have not found. Photos are also cited correctly to the respective authors. The talk page of this article only includes authors stating opinions on what they think should be included or not. One writer said the history section of spectroscopy shouldn't be included, while another just stated an abbreviation that could be used for atomic absorption spectroscopy. The other ones are explanations into what/why somebody added. I think the article is a good status. There has not been many recent edits over the years due to less research being used to improve it possibly? This article does a good job explaining in layman's terms, and a good detailed description of each section. This article could be improved by adding a section including the light spectra chart. Overall, the article is well developed with an interesting history.