User:Pebenisr/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.

Option 1

 * Cimex adjunctus
 * Article Evaluation
 * Very underdeveloped article. There is only a paragraph worth of information on Cimex adjunctus. Information needs to be added to thoroughly describe vector-host interactions.
 * Sources
 * Good, reliable sources from scholarly literature but only two articles are cited. Articles are relatively up to date (2016, 2018).
 * Sources
 * Good, reliable sources from scholarly literature but only two articles are cited. Articles are relatively up to date (2016, 2018).

Option 2

 * Porphyromonas
 * Article Evaluation
 * Once again, the article is underdeveloped. I think it would be interesting to explore because the little information we have on it relates Porphyromonas to the salivary microbiome and mentions how 16s rRNA has been used to sequence it (both topics we have talked about in class).
 * Sources
 * The sources are reliable, however, there are only two articles cited that were published less than 10 years ago. I would be interested to see if any new literature has been written since.
 * Option 3
 * Neisseria polysaccharea
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is too short and does not elaborate on the points it makes. There needs to be information added, including how Neisseria polysaccharea produces polysaccharide from sucrose. There is a lot of interesting information, but it is not contextualized or organized.
 * Sources
 * Sources are reliable (CDC, scholarly literature) but they are too few; only three sources are cited.
 * This article is too short and does not elaborate on the points it makes. There needs to be information added, including how Neisseria polysaccharea produces polysaccharide from sucrose. There is a lot of interesting information, but it is not contextualized or organized.
 * Sources
 * Sources are reliable (CDC, scholarly literature) but they are too few; only three sources are cited.
 * Sources are reliable (CDC, scholarly literature) but they are too few; only three sources are cited.