User:Ristinn/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: Transcription bubble
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article because it is related to the topics covered in our Molecular Genetics class. As a part of our assignment, I found this topic interesting to work on and develop it more.

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
There is no particular Lead in this article which includes a brief description of the article's major sections. However, there is an introductory sentence that describes the article's topic, but it could be more concise and clear.

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
The article's content is relevant to the topic and it is up-to-date. However, the content could include more information about the topic, which should be better organized. For example, few subheadings would make it easier to read and manage in the text.

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 rather neutral. There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position. Also, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader into any bias.

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
There is a list of references for this article, but they are not very precise. The sources are current, but there is only one inline citation, which is the reason why its sources remain unclear. This article could be improved by introducing more precise citations. The links within this article work.

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 article might be too technical to understand. It is also not well-organized. The article could be broken down into sections. This would make it easier to read and it would also reflect the major points of the topic. The article should be proofread. Grammatical and spelling errors should be checked as well.

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
The article does not include images that enhance understanding of the topic. The article could be improved by adding an image that is related to the topic. The image should also include a brief description.

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
This article is a part of the WikiProject Genetics. The article is rated as a Stub-Class on the quality scale. There is a comment on its Talk page suggesting that some terms should be explained in a simpler manner so everyone who reads this article could understand it.

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 is not well-developed. There are many aspects to improve it since it is rated as a Stub-Class article on the quality scale. It could be improved by introducing more precise citations, including images, as well as breaking its content into sections.

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: Talk:Transcription bubble