User:Pmatel16/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: Planktothrix
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article because it could use more information in general and the topic of this cyanobacteria with the ability to form toxic algal blooms is interesting. It also relates to our prokaryotic course!

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? YES
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? YES but not directly and not in the order the sections appear later on (can be rearranged)
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? YES
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is very short and straight forward

Lead evaluation
In general the lead is very short. It provides a good brief introduction to the topic in a straightforward leading sentence, but what follows could better relay the upcoming sections and give more details. There are good sentences with good sentencce structure and grammar, but they are not necessarily cohesive. The paragraph seems very choppy.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? YES
 * Is the content up-to-date? It was last edited last year, but many of its sources are old than 10 years
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? YES, overall there needs to be more content in general as there are only 3 short sections

Content evaluation
Overall the content that is included is good quality but nothing goes into very deep detail. The page itself is very short to the point where you do not even need to scroll to see the references, so more content would be beneficial and provide a more well-rounded introduction of planktothrix to the reader.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? YES
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? NO
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? NO
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? NO, there is no argumentative subject matter to address with the topic

Tone and balance evaluation
This topic is more of a concrete topic that does not leave much room for debate. I am not worried about any kind of conflicts of interest or wording that would persuade a reader any sort of way as this topic is much more about facts and definitions (informational not debatable).

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? YES
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? NO there are more details about algal blooms and other features that can be further addressed
 * Are the sources current? Most are from 20 years ago and the most current is from 2013
 * Check a few links. Do they work? YES the links are accessible

Sources and references evaluation
The sources linked do have good information. Due to the fact that this topic is factual and more based around definition, I would say that older resources are still okay to reference as the science may not have changed as far as identifying the species.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? YES
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? NO
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? YES sections that are present are good but more can be added

Organization evaluation
The sections addressed are a good start, but can use more content. I do like the order that the current sections are already in, but more sections could be added between them. The foreshadow or mention of upcoming sections in the lead should be in the order that the sections appear on the rest of the page fro better organization.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? YES there is one image but I have seen better and more should be included
 * Are images well-captioned? YES there is a caption but no detail included
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I hope so, it is linked to its source
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? SURE there is only one off to the side

Images and media evaluation
There is only one picture from a source that I had to have translated. I will have to look further into the copyright regulations, but I like the current picture. I think the page would benefit from having additional pictures as well. In the current image the planktothrix is quite small so a closeup would be nice. The captions could give more detail other than just the name.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? there is not much conversation at all
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It was part of 2 wikiprojects and is rated low importance
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We have not talked about planktothrix in class yet, but it does not mention anything about it's effects on the environment which would be why it could be brought up in our lecture

Talk page evaluation
There is not much talk and not a lot of work seems to have been done on this page in the past. Like I have mentioned there is not a lot of content in general and this is not a hot topic that many people feel the need to update. Theoretically if done right this page should not need much updating or editing as it's content should be factual and not dependent on time.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Needs improvement and basically just more information. It is quite short as is.
 * What are the article's strengths? I think the overall structure and existing section headings are good. Wording also seems appropriate level for common readers
 * How can the article be improved? More content is needed in general and the lead could be significantly improved in detail and organization
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is currently underdeveloped

Overall evaluation
Needs more detail and content in general.

Could use more pictures.

There should be mention of algal blooms.

Could benefit from updates sources.

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: