User:Nstynka/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is it written neutrally?
 * Does each claim have a citation?
 * Are the citations reliable?
 * Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)?
 * Check out the article's Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Consider posting some of your ideas to the article's Talk page, too.

Option 1
This is a good option, I am adding it. Notability might be a problem but the page has sat there for 4 years
 * Thulium(III) oxide
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is relevant to the field of chemistry as it is discussing a chemical compound. The article is part of a wiki project and has a mid importance. The article is neutral, but does not cover enough information. The article only has one citation but it is reliable. This article could use more information on the applications of this compound as well as research on it. The talk page of the article is not very active so likely not many people are already working on this article.
 * Sources
 * SciFinder has many articles discussing this compound.
 * Sources
 * SciFinder has many articles discussing this compound.

Option 2

 * Lineweaver–Burk plot
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is relevant to biochemistry and physical chemistry. While the article is within the scope of computational biology and rated low importance, it is applicable to chemistry. The article is neutral and does not contain any bias. The article does not provide enough information on the variables used. Additionally the derivation is not shown in full and major assumptions used during deriving are not addressed. Additionally the graphical relationships between V max and Km between different types of inhibition are not addressed enough.
 * Sources
 * Biochemistry and physical chemistry text books as well as articles
 * Sources
 * Biochemistry and physical chemistry text books as well as articles

Option 3

 * Nanotechnology for water purification
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is relevant to the field of chemistry as it describes one of its applications for water treatment. The article does not take a neutral point of view as it is written more like an essay or reflection rather than a scientific overview. As listen on top of the article this article would benefit by being rewritten more like an encyclopedic article. Not every claim in the article has a citation, but those that are cited are reliable. The article could improve from discussing more nanoparticles involved in water treatment as well as the processes used. The talk page of the article has no comments and the article was last edited about a year ago.
 * Sources
 * SciFinder and other journal articles
 * SciFinder and other journal articles

Option 4

 * Degree of unsaturation
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is relevant to the field of chemistry as it is very helpful in determining chemical structure. The article is part of the chemistry wiki project and rated as a start class project with mid importance. The article was edited very recently so other people may be working on it, however the talk page is very inactive. The formulas could be organized better and cost in DUs should be discussed. The introduction could better address what saturation is, to help with understanding degrees of unsaturation better. The article does not have many citations, but the ones it does have are reliable.
 * Sources
 * Articles and textbooks

Option 5

 * Bacillomycin
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is relevant to the field of chemistry and is part of the wiki project chemicals. It is a stub article with mid priority. The article has nearly no information, so editing this article would essentially just be writing it. The content in the article is neutral and all claims are referenced. The citations used are reliable but out of date. The talk page of the article is not active. The article was last edited this year so it is possible that someone is working on it currently.
 * Sources
 * Scifinder
 * Sources
 * Scifinder