User:YamsLeap/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Yeast expression platform

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

This article lacks credible information and reliable sources. Adding more to it will strengthen it and therefore, reflect the available literature on this topic. Given the brevity of this article, it would be difficult for it to contain the necessary credible information that would be required to cover this complex topic.

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.)

Lead Section: This article's introductory paragraph does a good job defining yeast expression platform and how it is used. However, it may require more information. The article includes statements that leave the reader with more questions than understanding. The article also lacks an overview of the its major sections. Without this information, the reader is unaware for the direction the article will take.

Content: These critiques apply to the following paragraphs as well. Each lack section is too brief to contain enough information. The content that is written is up to date and relevant to the topic.

Tone and Balance: This article is neutral as all viewpoints are accurately described and equally represented.

Sources and References: Only two references were used for the entire article. This indicates that not enough resources were used to convince the reader that information provided is credible. Was the information plagiarized? Did the writer compose the article based on their own knowledge? To convince the readers that the information is reliable, it requires more secondary sources.

Organization: The article was well written and it was well organized. The sections that required subsections were organized in a manner that made it easy to know where to look for certain information. There are a few minor grammatical errors.

Images and Media: This article only uses one image. Adding more diagrams would help the readers understand the differences between all the strains addressed. It makes more sense that all the information, including images, be on one page rather than having to seek it elsewhere.

Talk Page Discussion: The talk page discussion included concerns about advertisements that existed. However, the previous editor has already removed them because they felt it was inappropriate and unnecessary.

Overall Impressions: Overall, this article appears to be well written and contains valuable information. However, it doesn't do the complex topic enough justice. It requires more research, a diverse spectrum of credible sources, and more images. By making these changes, it'll strengthen the credibility of this article.