User:Vrwclemson/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: Sensory neuron
 * I chose to evaluate this article because I am currently taking neuroscience course and have some prior knowledge of the subject.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead contains a concise and clear introductory sentence that introduces the basic functioning of a sensory neuron. The information that is not present in the article are wiki linked to articles that do. The introduction leads up to the different types of sensory neurons in the body. The two major sections at the end “neuroplasticity” and “drugs” are not mentioned in the lead.


 * 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 content is divided into classification of sensory neurons, potential drugs as treatment, neuroplasticity, and an example of a sensory neurons present in other animals. The classification of neurons section is relevant and up-to-date, however, there should be a clarification that these neurons are for humans. On that note, the separate section for animals should be combined into the classfication section—spend more time on all animals clarify more differences between humans and animal sensory neurons. The source for sensory neuron targets for drugs is dated 1997 which could be further researched and updated.

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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is informational and maintained a neutral tone—there is no attempt to persuade the reader.


 * 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

There are a vast amount of sources but some facts still need verified with citation. The vastness reflects the thorough consolidation of literature available for sensory neurons. Some of the sources could be updated, such as the one regarding drugs, as there has been many advancements in the medical field.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The organization of the article is a bit confusing, as some of the heading sections (drugs and neuroplasticity) is not addressed briefly in the lead. Minimal grammatical errors and the writing and explanation is very concise—it wikilinks necessary information.


 * 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

The additional photos all come from the same source that does adhere to Wikipedia copyright regulations—it is free to use. They are in their own section all-together and are not laid out in a visually appealing way. Their captions state what they are but they are not directly linked to the article so they are not great at enhancing the topic.


 * 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

Editors are discussing whether or not to merge this article with sensory nerve. This is because that article is not thorough enough and there is overlap in information between the two articles. Both of the articles are apart of the Neuroscience Wikiprojects class. The information is consistent with the class, except the idea of merging two Wikipedia pages is new information. Editors have commented on people not leaving their reasoning/summary for their edits.


 * 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 article needs improvement in the fact sourcing and in organization. The material is not easy to read and as a student I would find it hard to read for a better understanding of sensory neurons unless I needed the basics in the lead. The article is strong in its conciseness. For these reasons, it is not well developed.


 * 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: