User:Sara J Mahmoud/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: "Fick's laws of diffusion" Fick's laws of diffusion
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have selected to evaluate Fick's laws of diffusion for a number of reasons. These reasons stem from my desire to cement an important concept that we have covered throughout the entirety of the course and which will likely resurface in my own career. Additionally I wish to review some intricacies of the Fick equation that I may have missed while also learning some background information that may have preceded the creation of the equation.

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
The lead of the article opens with a short sentence stating "Fick's laws of diffusion describe and were derived by Adolf Fick in 1856." Following this sentence, the lead discusses the diffusion coefficient, the concept of diffusion in regards to Fick's law, and ultimately concludes with a brief outline of topics to later be discussed in the article. Disregarding the occasional grammatical error found within the lead paragraph, the lead presents a short and concise look into Fick's law through relaying information relevant to the equation.

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 last time the content of the article was edited was on February 22, 2020, an extremely recent edit all things considered. The article has been organized in a fashion including background history of Adolf Fick, discussion of Fick's first and second laws accompanied with derivations, and a summary of different applications of the law in regards to liquid, conductors, and biology. In assessing the relevancy of the content discussed in consideration to the main topic of Fick's law, I believe that all of the aforementioned content is relevant. The article had not only explained the main concept of Fick's law but had provided well needed perspective through pertinent examples as with a Brownian motion problem statement. However, perhaps some of the application concepts listed through the detailed accounts of the sorption rate of diluted solute and semiconductor fabrication is unnesccary or drive the article off tangent of its main focus. The application paragraph preceding the in-depth review of these concepts suffices the discussion of Fick's law in practice.

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 appears to have a neutral tone set throughout its entire discussion of Fick's law. There is not one point in which the author asserts a claim, positive or negative, in regards to Fick's law. In fact, the article reads as more of a factual take on the equation, similar to what would be seen in a textbook, rather than an opinionated piece. Therefore, no viewpoint is overrepresented or underrepresented as their is no discernible view other than the scientific fact available for Fick's law.

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
The facts stated in the article were typically followed with a reference note. Upon revisiting the notes, each of the links referenced worked and corresponded to the reference cited. It should be noted that several of the links referenced were to other Wikipedia articles. Additionally, the articled included a "see also" section which depicted different related topics to Fick's law as diffusion, osmosis, and gas exchange which all linked to a Wikipedia article. The references cited possessed a wide range of dates from 1885, which pertains to the original Adolph Fick publication, to the most recent of 2017. The references are primary from scientific papers and wikipedia articles, therefore reliability could be in question. However, I believe the references listed are followed by their appropriate statement and do relate to the literature well enough, even if other sources could have been used.

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 succeeds in some areas and unfortunately has pitfalls in others. As stated previously, there are some apparent grammar mistakes throughout the article and while the mistakes were nothing egregious, it did disrupt the flow upon reading. However, the article does well to explain a difficult topic in lament terms in which anybody could truly understand when reading, as that is one primary goal for Wikipedia. After establishing the concept of Fick's law, the article again succeeds in evolving understanding through the use of derivations and examples. The article was broken up into six different sections outlined as history, Fick's first law, Fick's second law, derivation of Fick's laws, example solutions and generalizations, and applications. Each section was relevant to the topic and was displayed in a manner that flowed well for the reader to enforce a building block learning style.

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
Aside from the equations that appeared to be copy and pasted, there are only two images used in the article. The first depicting molecular diffusion, was actually a short video or gif, that represented the concept of diffusion on a microscopic and macroscopic point of view. The image had a detailed caption that described what was occurring in the top, middle, and bottom view of the short video. The image is also properly referenced and followed Wikipedia's copyright regulations. When considering Fick's law of diffusion, a fundamental understanding of molecular diffusion is helpful to envision the inner workings of the Fick's equation. The second image, similar to the first, depicted an application through a scheme of molecule diffusion in a diluted solute. This image although somewhat helpful in demonstrating the application of sorption rate, is hard to read and fairly small. The image is well referenced and follows Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

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 talk page of the article is extensive and is similarly broken up into an outline of content including suggestions for improvement by addressing some mistakes previously made in the article. The "Fick's laws of diffusion" article is apart of the WikiPhysics project and has been ranked mid importance on the importance scale. The conversations typically included ways to improve the article as adding derivations for both laws, which was done, or correcting dimensions for the diffusion constant. Other logistics as using the phi character, the title of the article, and changing the order of the sections were commented and ultimately addressed in the article. It was surprising to see how different authors collaborated into creating a better article that resolved concerns mentioned in the talk page. The article provided a more general knowledge of Fick's law compared to what was gone over in class. However the article explicitly went over the various derivations and implications of the terms as seen through the concept of steady state, which was discussed in class at a great length.

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 as mentioned before possess strengths and weakness. I believe a strength of the article is the all encompassing look that it takes for Fick's law, providing the reader with a holistic knowledge of the equation. Although the information is limited and somewhat minimum, it does well enough to provide the reader a basic understanding. I believe the article has been developed well but could definitely be better, with the tightening of the application section for an example. Other grammatical mistakes should also be addressed in order to improve the overall status of the article.

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: