User:Sgpete/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: Genetics of social behavior
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because genetics is interesting to me, and I especially like the nature vs nurture debate.

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 does include an introductory sentence that sums up the topic. It is broad, but it covers the basics of what the article is about. Although there is not information that is not discussed in the article, it doesn't talk about the study that most of the article is about a lot. The lead is very concise, and I would add a little more to it. However, what is already there is good, I would just add more.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The content all went back to the topic of the article. All of the research is from the early 2000s, so it is up-to-date. The last edit on the page was made in 2018. It does not relate to historically underrepresented populations. There is not enough information on the page as a whole, and more studies and facts should be added.

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 neutral. It evaluated and explains different research and results. When the results are uncertain, the article states that more research is still needed.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The article has citations in every few paragraphs, and the links to other articles work. It has multiple authors cited. It may need a few more citations I think.

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
I think that the organization is good, but the lead needs more information so that readers know about the future topic. Each topic has a heading, and it is clear what the paragraphs below will talk about.

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 lacks images. I think some should be added in order to put a visual on some of the studies.

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
There isn't a conversation going on in the talk bar. It is part of a WikiProject on genetics.

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 overall status of the article is a C. The article needs a better lead, more citation, and further research. What they have so far is written and organized well, but there is not enough information on the page. The article is underdeveloped right now.

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: