User:Oak1772/Evaluate an Article

User:Oak1772/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: Drosophila melanogaster
 * I chose this article to evaluate because it is relevant to the course and we will be making changes to the article as a class later in the semester.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the article opens up by describing an overview of what the Drosophila Melanogaster is and basic information about it.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, there is an introductory paragraph about the Drosophila Melanogaster and then it leads to the table of contents where the rest of the article can be found underneath.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * For the most part the information in the lead covers the information present in the article. There is a little bit about the history of the Drosophila Melanogaster in the lead which isn't a section of the paper, however most of the information can be found in the article itself.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and contains relevant information. It is not overly detailed and provides the information you need to know to start reading the paper.

Lead evaluation
The lead has good information that tells you what you can expect to find in the article, giving a good summary of the material covered in the article. It also included a little bit of the history of the Drosophila Melanogaster.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content is all related to the Drosophila Melanogaster. There is a section that covers other model organisms, but they are comparing it to the use of Drosophila Melanogaster in genetics.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * From what I can ascertain, yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No I think that all of the content is relevant.

Content evaluation
The content of this article is very relevant and is particular to the topic. From what I read and saw, all of the content was up to date.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes the article is neutral and uses a passive tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No the paper seems to be very neutral and very scientifically based.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The article seems to be very well balanced and provides a well rounded understanding of the Drosophila Melanogaster.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, the article is very scientific/research based. There is no push of any particular viewpoint.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of the paper is very knowledgeable and scientific. There are no positions that are heavily biased, it all is based on facts about Drosophila Melanogaster and their uses. The article is also well balanced.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The sources all seem to be scholarly articles from journals, books or databases.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes the sources are very thorough. They cover all of the topics in the article.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of the sources are current, there are a few old sources but they provide the basic insight into the Drosophila Melanogaster.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes the links work.

Sources and references evaluation
The article used many sources and from a various timeline. The sources appeared to be scholarly, being from journals and papers about the topic. A few were older sources, but they were still relevant to the topic.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes the article is well written. It is well organized and each section was concise and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not notice any errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes the article is very well organized, it covers all of the major points of the topics.

Organization evaluation
The paper was broken up into sections after the lead. There was a table of contents for each section included in the topic and the sections were well labeled. There didn't appear to be any grammatical errors and was very well written.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes the article uses images that are helpful for understanding.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Most of the images are well captioned, however there were a few with just a first sentence instead of a detailed caption.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * It seems that they are, they are cited.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes they are next to the topics that they are relevant to and don't take up a ton of space on the page.

Images and media evaluation
The article used images that were relevant to the topic and fairly easy to understand. They were all captioned, some being in more detail than others. There were a few images that could maybe be a little more detailed. The images were also visually appealing in layout and design.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The talk space is active with a lot of questions regarding the Drosophila Melanogaster and information that could potentially be added or updated.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a B class article and is apart of 4 WikiProjects; Molecular and Cell Biology, Insects, Genetics, and Diptera.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The page for Drosophila Melanogaster covers in depth material which we have not covered in class. We have not really talked much about the Drosophila Melanogaster, except in lab where we had a brief introduction.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is fairly active with discussion occuring about the Drosophila Melanogaster and some of the content on the page. The article is B class and apart of several WikiProjects. The discussion of Drosophila Melanogaster is more in depth than what we have talked about in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It's status is a delisted good article.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * That it is well written and has a lot of information.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * If a reader has little scientific knowledge it may be harder for them to understand the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is very well-developed.

Overall evaluation
The Drosophila Melanogaster article was very well written. The paper was well-organized and fairly concise with the information it provided. The article was completely neutral. It did not have bias and did not lean heavily in one direction. The only issue is that it may be difficult for someone with no scientific background to read but the information provided is quality, and well researched. The lead into the paper had a lot of information and was helpful for the content of the paper. After the lead there was a table of contents that was very helpful for the layout and information in the paper. The information was well cited and the links in the paper worked well. The paper also included educational graphics that reinforced the material in the article. Most of the images had good captions and explanations underneath them. Overall, the article about Drosophila Melanogaster was well written, well organized and included relevant and current information about the Drosophila Melanogaster.

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: