User:Savvyvans/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: Biology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This article was chosen to evaluate because its a topic I'm familiar with as well as being an article that relates to my course.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The article on Biology includes a lead which has an introductory sentence that clearly and precisely describes the topic of the article. The lead also includes a brief description of the major components of  the topic Biology. The lead does not contain information that isn't later included and expanded upon in the article. The lead appears to be concise and to the point of what the topic is about and what it includes in the article.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The overall content of the article is relevant to the topic biology and doesn't stray far off from the subject at hand. Some of the content may be a little out of date, some sources relating back to Darwin in relevance to the history of biology, but most is relatively recent and is around 2013. There doesn't appear to be any missing or unwanted additional content, so I'd say most is properly placed where it needs to be included.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article appears to be neutral and doesn't have any claims that are obviously or heavily biased toward a particular position or view on a topic. Most every viewpoint and subject has about the same representation within this article and I didn't see much of over or under representation.Article simply states the facts of biology and doesn't seem to attempt to persuade the reader of one position or another.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

From what I could tell, all facts were linked back to other sources, hopefully by reliable secondary sources. In the article there are plenty of external sources and appear to be very thorough on the topic at hand. Most sources are current, however some date back to Darwin due to reciting the history of biology. Of all the links I clicked on the check, they all worked and took me to the desired page.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article appears clear and concise, it gets to the point while following a logical order that is easy to read as an audience.There weren't any grammar or spelling errors that I noticed while reading the article. Each section of the article was broken down and well organized in a way that made sense that still reflected the main points of the topic.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

Thee article includes a couple images that enhance the understanding of the topic by including diagrams and even a punnet square. These images included in the article are well-captioned and give the audience a full description of whats needed to be understood about the image. The images seem to adhere to copyright regulations and even include a link for every image. Visually these images are presented in a unique way that follows the organization of the article and appeals to the audience.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

Conversations from a while ago discuss western biology beginning in Egypt and sources used for it, and lasted multiple paragraphs. Article is rated level 2, and as a natural sciences good article. Its part of four wikiprojects, however one of these is labeled as inactive. The way wikipedia discusses this topic is extremely simplified compared to the way I've been learning it, but I chose this topic because it's one I'm most familiar with and have had the most experience.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The status of this article is pretty important and its relevant to science so its important its kept up to date. The strengths of this article would include the organization and quality of the content presented within it, and that it should be simple enough for the common person to understand. I personally don't see a way for this article to be improved and I feel its been well developed as they update when its needed.


 * 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?

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: