User:Sara.n.york/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Bone Wars

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article was found within the topic of Paleontology History. With this classes focus being on Paleoecology, I found the title "Bone Wars" to be interesting and for it to be of historical significance to the classes main field of study it would be an interesting choice. With a quick overview, it appears to have a well developed table of contents as well as a long history of editing (over the course of multiple years) so I see this as a good article to evaluate.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section: The section is very clear, gives redirection to those looking for a slightly different page with similar titles, and gives a very easily understandable summary of what this page is about.

Content: The content seems to be well representing the background and information as to why there was conflict between these two men and how it created what is now known as the Bone Wars. There is mention of Indigenous people where there are proper articles linking to further information about the conflicts mentioned and they are discussed and seemingly represented appropriately and respectfully.

Tone and Balance: The basis of the article is that these two men, Marsh and Cope, were very hostile towards one another. Some of the language can feel dramatic at points but it seems to be well supported with evidence of their behavior. And, there is a very equal balance of neutrality between the two men. There is no opinionated writing about one or the other being more or less correct.

Sources and References: The article is very well cited. Upon review of a few source links, they are still functioning and truthful. Many citations also come directly from accredited books instead of websites that are harder to confirm as factual.

Talk page discussion: This article is a featured article, meaning it is considered to be one of the best and well represented Wikipedia articles. One of the discussions I see is about the rumors behind each of the men naming different things after each other to be cruel. There is search for more evidence and it is decided that because it is a widely known falsity that it could still be mentioned as such. I think that the mentioning of false rumors and recognizing them as such is helpful to readers who may be looking for confirmation of exactly that type of information.

Overall Impressions: This is a very well edited and reviewed article that is a very good representation of how an article should be written and reviewed.