User:ObviousZ/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Cell ablation

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The article is still not finished, it only provides the surface definition of the term. It matters since it lacks the coverage that's expected from the site, and it would better to work on rather than a completed article. My preliminary impression was that it only provides the definition of cell ablation, and things like its applications and classifications could be added.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

The article did pose a good introductory sentence to describe what the article is about.

The article didn't have major sections to expand more regarding the subject.

Article did not present any unrelated information.

As of now, the description is fairly concise.

Content

Content presented is relevant to the topic.

The content regarding cell ablation is not up-to-date since the only cited article was from 2001.

The article is not related to Wikipedia's equity gaps as it's a scientific concept of cells.

A lot of contents are missing from the articles, mainly the sub topics regarding origins of the term, applications, and classifications (techniques).

Tone and Balance

The article was presented in a neutral way.

Sources and References

Article missing citations and cited with sources that are not readily available to use.

'''Organization and Writing Quality '''The article is concise and clear but lacks expansive information regarding the term.

Images and Media

There are no images nor media within the article.

Talk Page Discussion

There are no discussion regarding the article in the talk page.

Overall Impressions

The article are clear and concise for regarding the basics of cell ablation.

The overall status of the article is incomplete, it can be left alone but it should be updated.

The article can be improved by adding more sections and discussing more regarding the usage and techniques of cell ablation.

Since the article only cover the basics, it is underdeveloped.