User:Reirei1216/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Talk:Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum) OR (Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(I chose this article to evaluate as I am an a previous Southern Arizona resident, who has traveled to and engaged in the Arizona Sonoran Desert Museum multiple times. My preliminary impression or initial impression of the article was one that thought it was very thorough, especially in regards to specifying the exhibits and history.)

Evaluate the article
(In the C-Class article about the Arizona Sonoran Desert Museum, the Lead section has a very thorough and straightforward introduction sentence that perfectly summarizes the museum. It does a good job of introducing the article's main sections, especially in regards to the exhibits featured, however, it does not mention any specifics in terms of conservation education, interactive aspects of the museum, or the history prior to discussing them in the initial sentence, which only specifies when the museum was established and how many people come (may be beneficial to include the fact that due to the high number of visitors, as the museum is one of the most visited attractions in Tucson, Arizona, the museum has implemented a number of interactive aspects to the museum, as well as ...etc). The article's lead is very concise, emphasizing on aspects of the article without going into too much detail, minus the aspects I already mentioned. In terms of the Content portion of the article, the article is rather up to date, with the last edit being on October 4th, 2023 at 15:20. Overall, the article's content is relevant to the topic of the Sonoran Desert Museum, especially when it comes to discussing multiple aspects of the museum's exhibits and history. The one issue I have with the format of the article is with the section dedicated to Harold W. (Hal) Gras, Jr., who was an important staff member in the early 1900's. This is the last paragraph of the essay and he has not been mentioned anywhere prior to this, which is very off-putting and honestly seems off-putting and random. I understand he was an important member of the staff for the museum, but if that is truly the case, he should have been introduced in the lead section like everything else, and the paragraph about him should be renamed to something along the lines of "Important contributors to the Museum" or something similar, rather than just throwing that in at the end. I think the article would have a far better flow if this man was discussed further towards the beginning of the article, and the last paragraph was used to tie the article together by bringing it back to what the Sonoran Desert Museum is truly about/it's purpose or goal of conservation. In terms of Wikipedia's equity gaps, this article does not address any topics related to underrepresented groups or topics, which could be easily fixed by discussing the aspects of Native American beliefs and practices when it comes to specific animals or plants (something that is present at the museum but is not included in this article). In terms of the Tone of the article, the overall tone is very neutral and does not present any opinion or belief other than just relaying facts. In terms of viewpoints, the article does not have any viewpoints, but rather focuses on facts such as the the different types of interactive stations or Docent Stations, community outreach and digital library. The only aspect of the article that could be viewed as opinionated would be the sentence regarding the "most influential member of staff", which is definitely something that can be up for interpretation, especially given the staff member was alive from the early 1900's until 1999. As I already stated, there is a large lack of viewpoints, thus minor viewpoints are missing from the article overall, as the article is primarily factual and not opinion based. When it comes to sources and resources, this article is supported by 17 resources in the Notes, as well as 3 external links or resources at the bottom. 3/17 sources are from the same website, with the first one regarding the history of the museum no longer being current (states link is unavailable when selected), whereas 2/17 of the sources are the same link accessed twice just on different years, which could be edited to only be one time. The TripAdvisor links, as well as the Chicago Tribune article regarding TripAdvisor's top 10 U.S. public gardens could be re-evaluated in terms of their accuracy and lack of bias. Despite this, I think the inclusion of the Museum's 2017 IRS Form was a very good touch and good resource to support that this Museum is non-profit, as stated in the article. Overall, most of the articles/resources work, with the exception of the first, however, all of them are not current, with the newest article being from 8/30/2018, and the oldest being from February 21, 2010. In regards to the organization of the article, I think that the order of the paragraphs could be re-evaluated as I previously stated, especially in regards to the inclusion of the paragraphs regarding Hal Gras and the Desert Ark Program, the Desert Museum Press and Operations and Support, as they were not mentioned in the Lead portion or introductory portion of the article, and seemed out of place and "dumped" into the article. Overall, the article lacks spelling errors but has an issue with long run-on sentences, as seen at the end of the paragraph about the Desert Museum Press, which features a lot of commas and is hard to follow. As I previously stated, there is a very prevalent issue with introducing topics before discusses them, such as the paragraph regarding the Ironwood Gallery, which is never mentioned prior to the paragraph, and lacks any sources or links to an external source supporting this gallery, leaving the reader confused and unsure as to what the Ironwood Gallery even is. In regards to the Media and Images present in the article, the article features 4 pictures depicted some of the animals that can be found in the museum, which include a mountain lion, coyote, Colorado River Toad, and Costa's Hummingbird. The article does not feature any maps of the museum besides the initial Google Maps one under the logo at the top of the article, as well as not featuring any images regarding the Live Presentations such as the Raptor Free-flight or the Docent Stations. The article also lacks any sources and information on the Desert Museum Press, only mentioning it without going into too much detail regarding the reliability of the information, and lacks any pictures or links to the field guides and volunteer Programs such as the Desert Ark Program discussed. In terms of the Talk Page for this article, this article is of interest to three different WikiProjects; Museums, United States: Arizona, and Zoo, all of which are ranked as C-Class. There are three different Wikipedia contributors to this article, which include Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum, 207.224.156.202, and 67.212.202.194. Overall, this article is a C-Class article, which means that the article is substantial but is still missing important content or features irrelevant material, such as reliable sources and features significant problems. In terms of my overall opinion, this article was very abrupt in terms of the later paragraphs, as well as not introducing the topics of said articles prior to them being discussed. In regards to the strengths of this article, I felt that this article did a very good job of providing different aspects of the the desert museum and not repeating the same thing over and over, however, this is discounted due to the fact that most of the different topics are short and lack a substantial amount of current information. This article could be improved by providing more recent resources and articles to reference, especially when it comes to the paragraphs that only feature a few paragraphs and no forms of media, or links to other Wikipedia articles, such as the Desert Ark Community Programs. Overall, I think the article is somewhat well-developed but is lacking in certain regards, especially in regards to the lead or introduction portion of the article, as well as an accurate amount of reliable resources.)