User:Pepperonys/Evaluate an Article

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: Black queen cell virus (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * The name of the virus sounded interesting, so I decided to check it out.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead does include an introductory sentence that describes the virus, and including the species that are specifically affected by the virus. There is lack of description for the article's major sections. There is brief mention of agricultural importance that was not present further in the article. Overall, the lead needs more details since it is short.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content in the article is relevant to describe the virus which commonly affects bees. The content needs to be updated since there is usage of older research articles and there could be newer information pertaining to the virus. I think that the description content can be expanded into further sections since there isn't enough information on prevention and isolation methods. Information about the ecology and evolution of the virus should be mentioned.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

For the most part, the article seems to be neutral. There was mention in the lead sectionthat the virus is important to know about since it affects bees. This makes it seem that the article is attempting to convey that the virus is more important than other viruses.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The sources used are reliable and the article uses the sources well. However, most of the sources used were not published within the last five years. Upon searching topic of the virus, there is current information that could be updated and used in this article. The oldest article used was 1982, which I feel shouldn't have been used. Sources' links work, but most include only the abstract and it would have been nice to read more information on the topics cited.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

For the most part, the article is easy to read. I did not notice any grammatical errors. I felt that that interactions section should have been put with the viral interaction with host section.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article did not include pictures related to the virus specifically. There was only one picture used and it was of a virus protein of the same order, so it wasn't pertaining to the virus itself. Overall it would have been nice to include picture of the capsid proteins since there was mention of them.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding question

There were no conversations on the talk page. The article is part of the Wiki Project Viruses and is rated as low-importance. We have not discussed this topic in class.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall, the article needs improvement, underdeveloped. It lacked pictures and information. Although, I would say that the article's strengths were the structure and genome section. Area of improvement included updating the information, including pictures, and reorganization the structure of the article.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

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:Talk:Black queen cell virus