User:Squirrel1772/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: (Drosophila melanogaster)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I am evaluating this article, because this is the article we are going to be working on and editing as a class.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The Lead has an introductory sentence that is descriptive of the topic for the article, yet not too wordy.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead does a good job at introducing the major subjects of the article in an interesting and engaging manner.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead contains sticks to what is in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Content is relevant and informative. The content also covers a wide range of topic that involve the subject, giving the reader a good blend of information.
 * Is the content up-to-date
 * Most of the content is recent, some studies are older though.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * All content seems to be intact.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Article is neutral and evenly displays information.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No bias found.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Information is very straightforward.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Not really.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * It appears that most if not all the facts are backed by secondary source info.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Most of the sources are from journal publications an appear to be sound.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Some of the sources are a little old, but the information still appears to be relevant.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * So far the links work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * A little wordy in some places but other than that the article is well-written.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Minimal grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Good organization

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * I really like the images. They are both supportive to the material and draw the readers attention.


 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The images are of good quality and composition.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * The images appear to follow Wikipedia's copyright regulations. They each are cited from where they are from, or noted as original work.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images are laid out in a manner that flows well with the presentation of material.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Wow! It is so cool to see all the conversations going on at once. Some of the conversations are around 15 years old. Others are more recent. One of the more recent ones is proposing an edit to the polygamy section, and includes proper citations to accompany their proposals.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article is rated as B-class. It is a part of WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology, WikiProject Insects, WikiProject Genetics, WikiProject Dipter.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class

- We are just starting to breach the topic in class. The wiki article is more in depth than what we have learned yet.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's overall status is delisted good article.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article presents an array of information about the subject in a brief and concise setting.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think the visual spacing is the main thing to be improved. I don't like the big white chunks of empty space. It makes scrolling through seem to take longer.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article seems very well developed. Once I learn more about Drosophila melanogaster I might change that appraisal though, as I learn about all the article is missing content wise.

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: