User:Tisaachsu/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I will be evaluating this article: Honey bee

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I had just done a presentation the previous week regarding honeybees. I thought this would be a good topic to review since I have some preliminary knowledge on the subject matter and the topic relates to what we are studying in H195 (insects).

Evaluate the article
Lead section: Overall, the article has a good leading section with only some small issues. The topic sentence is good but there are subsections in the article (ie. life cycle, pollination) that are not mentioned in the introduction.

Content: I thought this article was very comprehensive and covered everything about the honeybee from its life cycle to its physiology and environmental interactions. There are many references used that are newer than 2016 so the content is likely up-to-date. In terms of the actual content, my only problem is that some of the information presented, such as symbolism and beekeeping, seem to be topics that do not really belong in the article since they relate more to hobbies and literature than biology.

Tone/Balance: This article was balanced and had a neutral tone. I did not read any section that seemed like the author was trying to persuade the reader to any perspective. The article was presented in a very blunt and informatic way that simply stated facts in a didactic way.

Sources/References: As mentioned before, many of the sources were recent, making the content of the article very up-to-date. Many of the presented facts were linked to a reference and I did not see any extraneous citations that were not applicable to the article. In addition, other Wikipedia articles related to topics mentioned in the article were also linked to key words. The links to the articles worked and I had no problem viewing the information.

Organization: The organization of the article was decent overall. Topics were grouped in a way such that subtopics were under broader headings, which made it easy to look for information I wanted to see. However, I think the article would have been better organized if biological topics were grouped together and followed afterwards with extraneous topics like beekeeping. This would have made it so that the paper did not seem to be jumping around topics without any specific order.

Images: Images were well spaced within the article so that they were next to the topic in question. I also really liked how pictures that did not fall under any specific topic were placed in an image gallery at the bottom of the article. Images were cited and followed Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

Overall: I thought this was a very informative article about honeybees. Compared to other much shorter Wikipedia pages, I thought that the information was nicely flushed out so that the article covered a variety of topics regarding to bees. The article was nicely written and I did not get the feeling that the author was trying to push any specific perspective on the reader. In my opinion, this article is very complete and could only use some minor corrections to the introduction as well as the general organization of the paper.