User:Wikisabella/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: Germ layer
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I've chosen to evaluate this article because it's not super extensive thus doesn't extend beyond my realm of understanding. Additionally, it is a topic we've covered in the course via various in-class lectures and lab exercises, so I feel comfortable judging the content and understanding the vocabulary.

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 introductory sentence is a sufficient general description of germ layers, but I believe it should be clearly stated somewhere in the introduction that the three commonly found germ-layers are the mesoderm, endoderm, and ectoderm. There isn't much of an introduction/summary of the topics discussed, since the germ-layers aren't explicitly listed altogether in this lead, evolution isn't really referenced, and the neural crest is not mentioned at all. Because this page is shorter, the lead should be able to include those subheadings under germ layer. All parts of the lead are reiterated later in the article. I feel as though the discussion into the differences between eumetazoans, cnidarians, and chordates may be a little too much information for this initial introduction, or at least if they are included then the rest of the lead should be further elucidated to make those distinctions seem less out of place.

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?

Content evaluation
All of the article's content is relevant to the topic, and generally does a good job of capturing the important aspects of the germ layer, through briefly discussing the history, to evolution, to development, to germ layer specificities. This article is also quite outdated, with the last conversation being had back in 2013. I believe there's a lot of room to elucidate the developmental and evolutionary traits exhibited by the germ layer, as well as to incorporate experiments that would facilitate a better and more thorough understanding of the topic (such as, looking at specific organisms through development or linking specific organisms).

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
Yes, this article is quite neutral, which is not extremely difficult seeing as it's also quite lacking in content overall. All of the sentences included in this article are very direct in their explicit conveyance of information, and leave no room for biases or opinions to be formed—they're based on scientific fact, which is almost all referenced. There are no overrepresented or underrepresented viewpoints in this article either, as the article is really a bare-bones list of qualities attributed to the individual germ layers. Even in the history section, there is no particular emphasis on one scientist's discoveries over another/the others. There is no persuasion in this article either, since the facts are very clear and concise with no reason for misinterpretation.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

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
Although this article is not as fleshed out/filled with examples as I would like, it is still clear, concise, and broken down in a reasonable way. There are no grammatical or spelling errors that I could see, and most of the sentences had a simple structure that made it very easy to read. In terms of structure/organization, the article was broken into the important subdivisions, under which there were further categories when appropriate (under germ layer), bullet points when appropriate, and short paragraphs when appropriate. Overall, as I mentioned, I believe there should be more information provided in the individual subcategories, and the lead should be a better abstract of the information, but organizationally and as the information currently stands, there are no blatent errors.

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 images are probably the most fleshed out aspect of this article, and they illustrate well the concept of the germ layer, while also enlisting some examples of specific cells and organisms. The images are well captioned, and directly refer to the discussed material in the article. It appears that all of the images are adhering the Wikipedia's copyright regulations, and have external links to further information. The images are all laid on the right side of the article, and could probably be positioned better to further explain concepts/link them more directly to the content to which they're referring.

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
In the talk page, there have been discussions on merging the page with organogenesis, merging the page with ectoderm, endoderm, and mesoderm, and then acute edits about specific sentences or suggestions to include more figures. The talk page is quite stale, though, as I mentioned earlier the last edit was made in 2013. Additionally, it appears that a college developmental biology class worked on constructing the page back in 2005, and I'm assuming they did most of the work, which could be why the page feels a little bland and disjointed at times in terms of the sentence structure/flow/where and what is being described most accurately. The page is a part of WikiProjects Human anatomy and WikiProjects Anatomy. Wikipedia's discussion of this article does not differ a ton from the detail which we've gone over the germ layers in class. However, the page definitely does not reference many reports nor explicitly discuss the ways germ layers and organogenesis can be impacted by external/internal factors, which is something much more emphasized in our developmental biology class.

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
Overall, the article seems underdeveloped, and could use some potential restructuring with the images and figures (although their quality is fine, just their placement is an issue). The article is strong in that it touches on many different topics and gives the basics for understanding in a clear and concise way with no grammatical errors or opinionated influence. However, the article is weak in that it does not describe the features in enough detail to get a better understanding of the evolutionary and developmental mechanisms which influence the development of germ layers, which is a key part in the discussion of organism development. The article is somewhat developed, in that it references the necessary features of the topic, but because it does not fully flesh out the material in a thorough manner, it is still underdeveloped.

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: