User:RandomCitizen27/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Koko (gorilla)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I was expecting it to be controversial and biased despite it likely being well researched. This article also had a very active Talk page, unlike most of the other articles I considered. Lastly, Koko and her training in sign language relates to what we are currently covering in class on the study of learning by comparative psychologists. While kept in captivity, Koko was trained how to do a behavior (sign language) that would not be observed naturally in the wild. This reflects the studies done by comparative psychologists that we've learned about in class, and mirrors the zoo and circus animals that were trained to perform tricks that we covered in class as well. Lastly, the article even mentions that some scientists argued that Koko's behavior was a result of operant conditioning, further indicating that this article is highly relevant to our lectures on comparative psychology.

This article is important because Koko is a well known animal used in cardinal research into animal behavior, communication, and psychology. This Wikipedia page serves as a sort of biography and introduction to Koko's life so should be able to provide an in-depth and neutral overview of her life and the training she underwent.

At first glance this article appeared well organized and well researched. The article's organization into subheadings and paragraphs was logical and seemed appropriate. The article appeared well researched because it had over 60 sources from media ranging from peer-reviewed journal articles to newspaper articles. This article also appeared as though it was well written, as it had a fair amount of information on the page, but upon further inspection some of these of these first impressions were dissolved.

Evaluate the article
This article has good structure, grammar, and syntax, but has a slightly unbalanced tone at times and despite a large references section, requires more information.

Content:

The lead paragraphs contain information that would be better placed elsewhere in the article. In my opinion, the first paragraph should be the entire introduction, as it gives a very succinct overview of Koko. However, the fact that Koko was also made popular by her use of sign language should also be added to this paragraph. As mentioned in the Talk page, the phrase "revealing her ability to rhyme" should probably be removed as it is controversial; it also seems ineffectual to add, as it seems to attempt to convince the reader of Koko's use of language. The remaining two paragraphs in the introduction are better suited for the section on her use of language or a section on her training.

The article concerns Koko's life before being given to Francine Patterson (see: early life and popularity), as well as after her time with Patterson (see: Later life and death) but does not adequately cover her life while in Patterson's care. Since Patterson spent so much time with Koko and presumably would have written many scientific papers on her, there must be a record of how she was trained and how she was treated and kept while in Patterson's care. While some information could be trickier to keep neutral (such as if there were any animal rights infringements), to get a deeper understanding of Koko this article needs more information on the details of her life with Patterson. The paragraph on her popularity could also be elaborated on more, such as detailing the interactions with each of the celebrities, how she interacted with them, any scientific conclusions they could draw from those interactions, and what lead her to be able to take a photo of herself in the first place.

One member of the talk page also mentions that discussion of Koko's parents is lacking, despite the apparent availability of this information. In the "Later life and death" section, Koko's age when she returned to California should be added, as that allows readers to know how long she spent under Patterson's care.

They have a photo of Koko and have all of their copyright information in order (all photos of Koko are subject to copyright). This, and the "In media" section is a very nice addition to this article.

The direct quote "Is, like her mother, a larger frame Gorilla" in the "Later life and death subsection" is not cited. A "citation needed" tag should be added or this sentence should be removed until a source is provided. That being said, I am not sure why the comment on her weight is necessary in this paragraph about the other gorillas she lived with. If it is speculated that Koko's weight contributed to her unexpected death then it should be fairly stated, perhaps in the next paragraph on her death. Speaking of which, if more information can be found on the cause of her death it would be notable information to include.

Tone:

Despite the best efforts from Wikipedians on the Talk page, the article, does not come across as entirely neutral. There are several points in the article that require development of counterpoints. The largest problems occur in the "Characteristics" subsection, but there are other minor hiccoughs in the article that hint at a bias towards Koko. For example, the third introductory paragraph states that the extent to which Koko mastered language is disputed, and offers what she understood, but does not address the arguments of those that believe she had not mastered sign language. In that same paragraph the author mentions Koko's scores on infant IQ scales, but further down in the article (see: Intelligence) the writer cited that those IQ scales may not have adequately assessed Koko's intelligence. This should have been mentioned directly after the first mention of these tests in the introduction to ensure the reader could draw their own conclusions on Koko's intelligence.

In the first paragraph of the "Use of language" section, the article should also consider counter arguments to Koko's "mastery" of sign language. Although the last paragraph of this section touches on disputes over whether she understood what she was doing, actually learned the signs, or whether she was prompted by her trainers to sign certain things, the article should still explore the reasons why people thought that she had not mastered sign language. The last paragraph could also elaborate more on the argument that Koko was operantly conditioned. Lastly, after mentioning the "critical evaluations of [Patterson's] reports," the article could explain how Patterson or others defended their positions.

Sources:

The list of references is long, but that does not inherently mean that it is a strong list. There are a good amount of peer-reviewed journal articles from a variety of authors, but there are also several videos cited and some sources may not be completely neutral. There are several articles from non-independent sources, such as "Koko.org" and "The Gorilla Foundation," the latter of which likely benefited from positive publicity from Koko, as its founder was her caretaker, Francine Patterson. The potential bias of these sources is not noted in the article whatsoever and should be included. While most of the links worked, I found 2 (number 18 and 32) that were no longer active, both from Koko.org. These links may be down due to temporary maintenance, but if they are permanently broken they should be fixed or the sources (and information taken from them) should be removed from the article.

Talk page:

The talk page is well developed and has been frequented from 2015 to present. Despite a few unprofessional comments, such as one user calling another's comments "annoying," overall the talk page is productive and respectable. The discussions are thorough and stress the importance of neutrality in the article. Users often bring up regulations or advice from Wikipedia to work though suggestions. Based on reviewing revisions since December 2015, the users have contributed greatly to the overall article, adding images, information, sources, and ensuring the article's neutrality.

This article is rated as start-class, level-5 vital article (an article that English Wikipedia should have, but with the lowest importance). It is noted to be controversial and contain information that may be in dispute. The start-class rating is justified because as mentioned earlier this article is lacking a lot of information and is not completely neutral in tone. The level-5 rating of this article makes sense: Koko is a relatively minor subject in the context of animal behavior or psychology as a whole, but she also influenced many studies on learning, animal communication and animal behavior, and was quite popular among the general public at one time. Because of these reasons it makes sense that they want this article to be on Wikipedia. It is good that the Talk page says that this information is controversial and may be in dispute, but this warning should be moved to the main article because most general users (I am speaking from experience,) do not check Talk pages.

In summary, this article serves as a good starting point for future edits but is lacking information and needs restructuring and editing to maintain a neutral tone throughout the article. In particular, information on Koko's life and training while under Patterson's care should be added, as well as counterpoints regarding the extent to which she mastered sign language.