User:Nmeckel13/Evaluate an Article

Schistosoma intercalatum
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (Schistosoma intercalatum)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because it is related to the class.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?  Yes
 * 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
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?  Concise

Lead evaluation
The lead is concise but could use some more information that talks about the rest of the major sections in the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Some
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There might be some missing content.

Content evaluation
The content is relevant and the article was recently edited within a few months but there are no up-to-date sources, most are 10 years old or older. The article references another organism for comparison but there is no information on that organism.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * 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? No

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is very balanced and I didn't find any information that appeared to show a bias.

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? Yes
 * Are the sources current? No
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
All the facts are cited. The links work even though most are old. The sources are from reliable websites like the CDC or from academic journals.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?  Yes. The article is formatted nicely and is easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Organization evaluation
I think the article is formatted in an organized way that anyone can navigate the important topics listed.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?   Yes, one image is included.
 * Are images well-captioned?  Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?   Yes, the image is properly cited.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?   Yes the image is at the top of the page next to it's classification.

Images and media evaluation
There is only one image and it has a correct citation that can lead anyone to the source, which is the CDC's website. There could have been more images included since the one shown is only of the organism's egg.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?    No conversations were going on except a history of edits.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated a C-Class article and Low-Importance.    It is part of WikiProject Animals and WikiProject Medicine.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?            The article talks more about epidemiology and pathology.

Talk page evaluation
I didn't find any conversations on the talk page. I found it interesting that it was rated a C-Class article since there was a decent amount of information about the article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Low-importance
 * What are the article's strengths? It talked about epidemiology and pathology in great detail.
 * How can the article be improved? The organism's life cycle could be improved on. More pictures.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?   It is well-developed.

Overall evaluation
Overall I think the article did a good job at describing the parasite but could use some more details and images of the parasite.

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: