User:PrincessAnna27/Choose an Article

Option 1

 * Article Title: Animal Sexual Behavior :
 * Article Evaluation: C, Completeness 59, 432 views per day

Lead Section
The lead section was not bad. It was descriptive but there might be a little too many examples in the beginning. Otherwise, it gives a good introduction to the topic and did not seem to include irrelevant information. Might be a little over detailed at some parts.

Content
More info for some sections than other, could be due to less research on the subtopic. Section on seahorse heavily imply that they’re bisexual and do not show partner preference- should be looked into.

Tone and Balance
Throughout reading the page, I noticed that some sections had a more colloquial feel to them. In addition, I noticed some bias, for example in the section “interpretation bias”. Some political terms were used, should definitely be looked into.

Sources and References
The sources and references need some work. Some areas of text were missing citations. Some were labeled as “unreliable”, which should definitely be looked into because I saw it multiple times throughout the page. Otherwise, the links do work. Many of the resources seem to be papers or pages from journals. And the links to the few I clicked on work.

Organization and Writing Quality
I like the way the page was structured. I felt like it was organized and easy to read. I didn’t see any obvious grammar or spelling issues however, I did feel like some sections were written more colloquially than other wiki pages I have read.

Image and Media
I think that one of the best qualities of this page is the images and media. The images are very diverse. Some show animals (ex: dog-coyote hybrid), others show small clips (ex: cannibalistic mating behavior). One of the first images show a bird with its anatomical parts relating to mating labeled with numbers and they are described in the caption. Very good job.

Talk Page Discussion
On the talk page, it is mentioned that this article was used twice for the Ambassador Program Assignment and as a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Otherwise, some errors were pointed out in terms citation. Felt some bias.

Overall Impressions
This was an interesting article to read, especially because it taps into one of my personal interests, as well as research focus. I would definitely like to work on this page, I can already see some things that could be changed, worked on, or looked into.

Option 2

 * Article Title: Homosexual Behavior in Animals :
 * Article Evaluation: C, Completeness 93 (did not originally notice this, will not be using this article), Views 1224

Lead Section
In the lead section, there is a clear description of what the article will be discussing. There are some examples included that describe what “homosexuality” can be in animals. There is a brief description of the content and it is not overly detailed. There is also no extra information. They include an example of an animal that exhibits homosexual tendencies, not sure if this would be considered too much detail.

Content
The content written on the page is relevant to the topic. It is thorough and would help a reader understand it. I don’t think anything is missing out out of place. To work on this article, maybe more animal examples can be added. I noticed that there are some resources that are kinda old. However, don’t think this is fully a bad thing because it makes sense in context for some parts.

Tone and Balance
I believe that this article is neutral but some parts may be seen as bias. For example, it was mentioned that most homosexual behaviors that were seen in lab animals would not be seen in those from the wild. That the scientists altered certain things, which made the animals exhibit a homosexual behavior. Not sure if I’m thinking too deep into this. I personally don’t think it’s bias. The article does a good job of providing examples of homosexual behaviors in animals otherwise.

Sources and References
From what I have seen, the sources are mainly websites or scientific articles, or possibly books. Some studies were mentioned. It seems current but there is also research that is from the mid 1900’s. The links that I have clicked on work.

Organization and Writing Quality
After reading the article, I feel like it is well written. I like how it is broken up, easy to find information. I do not think there are spelling or grammatical mistakes.

Image and Media
The pictures and captions could be a little more intriguing. For the most part, there are just pictures of 2 animals together with a caption saying that they’re of the same sex. I think that better pictures and content could be used.

Talk Page Discussion
There are only a few comments. One mentioned a typo and the other 2 were related to a statistic that was written about in the article. All issues were resolved.

Overall Impressions
I enjoyed reading this page. I thought it was interesting that although many animals can exhibit homosexual behaviors, within lab settings they occur because something was manipulated (ex: hormone in utero). Otherwise, in the wild there is less of an occurrence of these behaviors. Nonetheless, there are still animals that do prefer same sex relations in the wild, they are just more rare. I think that this would be a good article to work on, it was rated a C and definitely has room for improvement, especially for pictures.



Option 3

 * Article Title: Religious Behavior in Animals :
 * Article Evaluation: S; Completeness 51; Views 100

Lead Section
This section of the page is very brief, quickly skims main point of article. This page does not have a lot written so this section is fairly short. Does not mention any irrelevant information.

Content
The page is mostly examples of ritual behaviors, not good reasoning on why this occurs. Could be written better.

Tone and Balance
Did not seem overly bias. Some parts sound colloquially written.

Sources and References
Multiple references to other wiki page, not sure if this is a good thing.

Organization and Writing Quality
The organization is fine. Mainly separated into examples and other religious discussion.

Image and Media
No images or media was included on this page. Should definitely be added.

Talk Page Discussion
Someone recommended a title change, to what it is currently because original title was not appropriate. Also, someone mentioned certain biases that are displayed within the page.

Overall Impressions
Overall this was an ok article but not my favorite.