User:Prokarylotic Lover/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.


 * Microbial toxin
 * I am interested in being able to report accurate and up to date information on microbial toxins.

Lead
Sorry I deleted the lead guiding questions. Didn't realize that there was an evaluation portion dedicated.

Lead evaluation
The article has an introductory sentence that is succinct and appropriate. The lead does give an overview of the sections covered but does not indicate why viral toxins are also included in microbial toxins. In the strictest sense of the word a virus would not be considered a microbe as it is not an organism. The lead also doesn't introduce information that is not covered in the article. Because of this the lead is kept short and to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
All of the content in the article except for the section about viral toxins is relevant. I would consider having that be a new page but it appears that there is only one characterized viral toxin which is not enough to devote a whole page to. The content of the page needs to be updated as much of the sources are over ten years old. Ten years can involve a lot of development in the pharmaceutical industry as biotech companies have been looking for more therapeutic uses of microbial toxins. I think that there could be more examples of microbial toxins as well as the uses of each one. One example that could be added is botulinum toxin and it's use in Botox. Another big missing thing is an explanation on how microbes use their toxins in their environment. Some of the conditions needed to produce toxins.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral and doesn't make any claims or have any viewpoints. With such a small article there is a lot to improve on but I would say that it is very balanced.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Not all facts are backed by source such as the line in the lead that says botulinum toxin is one of the most potent natural toxin in the world. There could be a lot more sources cited as this is a small topic. The sources are out of date and should be updated. Some links are broken. Most of the links to articles are still working.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article is very clear. I did not see any blatant spelling or grammar errors. I think that there are some parts that should be revised to make sentences more clear.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
There are no images or any other kind of media. I think it may be useful to have an image of some microbial toxins from the protein data base or some drawings that depict some of the mechanisms of action of microbial toxins. For example, many microbial toxins act by forming pores in cellular membranes. I am sure that a section and a picture could be devoted to that subject in this article.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
The conversations about this topic are a decade old and talk about merging this article with another article also on microbial toxins. Other wikipedians mention that the unique part of this article is the section on fungal toxins which appear to have a lot of research on them so the section could be expanded upon. This article is part of the wikiproject on medicines and is rated as low-importance and start-class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
The article needs to be updated with new information and the topic could be broadened to include mechanisms of action for microbial toxins. One of the strengths mentioned in the talk page is that the article covers a small part of fungal toxins which needs to be expanded on. The article is underdeveloped.

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 — ~


 * Talk:Microbial toxin