User:Wafflemaker02/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Evolutionary biology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article is considered top importanace in the biology field but is only rated class C in the field of completion. Moreover, I study biology in university and have a better understanding of the subject compare to other wiki projects. Evolutionary Biology is the concept that unify all Biology disciplines, therefore, I find it essential to edit it for a more comprehesive article.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The lead is well written and contains a brief and concises description of the article topic. However, it does not provide a brief description of the article's major section. Instead, it includes unnecessary information that could be placed in a different section instead.

The section, "Drugs Resistance Today" does not contain enough citation and have a claims that heavily rejects modern medication. It describes HIV are resistant to medications but does not provide citations that support this idea. It mentions antibiotic resistence to support their claim to reject modern medication but fails to mention that the importance and positives of antibiotic to maintain a netural tone. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/vec.12842 It also fails to mention that despite the antibiotics resistence, natural selection is not eliminated through humans due to medication, it promotes fear in readers with taking medication as it is only talking about the negative sides of medication in human evolution.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780124201903000430

Moreover, the images are not well-captioned and does not have enough images. For example, in the section "History", the caption purely state that the image is a mammalian phylogeny and does not provide further information about the diagram. Moreover, the diagram does not provide context to the history of evolution, but it seemed unrelated to the topic. The diagram shoulded be placed under the phylogenetic tree section instead.

The section about current research topics are not up to date as well, most citations and research topics are dated back to 20 years ago, with the most recent one being 14 years ago. Evolutionary biology#cite note-34\The wikipedia talk page also mentions to talk more about key research papers for more comprehensive section.

The writing is mostly clear, however the writing contains some grammatical mistakes and wordy sentence that makes it hard to read sometimes. The page requires further editing.