User:Zeus Aurelius/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Virgin soil epidemic

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The vast majority of deaths of Native Americans upon the arrival of European settler were not by homicide, but through the exposure to a manifold of diseases to which Native Americans had no immunological resistance to. This epidemiological effect, called the Virgin soil effect, has only rarely been identified in recent history, but it might carry significance for potential future encounters of previously-untouched ecosystems. Potential examples from common imagination might include exposure to carbon-based microbial life on other planets in the Solar System (as depicted in Life (2017 film)), or cross-interaction of previously separated ecosystems due to climate change.

Lead section
The article starts off with a reasonably good lead sentence. However, the lead sentence consists mostly of a direct quote from primary academic sources, instead of restating in simpler terms what the paper meant.

The lead section is a bit clustered, partially because it directly begins to elaborate the concept of a Virgin soil epidemic while also touching on different academics' assessments. It might be favorable to instead briefly summarize the main upcoming sections, and then split the descriptive paragraph into "Description", "History" and "Debate". It also lacks a descriptive image and the usual right-hand section containing Wikipedia links that embed the concept into a larger framework, for example linking to Pandemic, Smallpox Genocide of indigenous peoples, European colonization of the Americas, and other important related articles.

Content and Organization
With the lead section containing much of the descriptive content, the article lacks overall detail and structure. There are no dedidacted content sections other than "Debate", which weighs the perspective of various academic authors on the topic. It weighs those perspectives fairly and neutrally, though. Some views are described lengthily and could be shortened.

Given the relative lack of recent research on the topic, the article is mostly up-to-date. It fairly represents the most important underrepresented minority group relevant to the topic: Native Americans. It fails to briefly elaborate on the similar decimation of Australian Aboriginies due to smallpox and/or chickenpox. If there should have been similar instances for European colonization of Africa or other historical instances, it fails to mention those.

Tone and Balance
The majority of content of the article describes different academics' point of views, but it manages to do so while staying neutral and clearly describing controversies, debates, and differences of academic opinion. The article steps away from drawing any biased conclusion or weighing certain opinions heavily.

Sources and References
Given the low research activity, the sources and references are up-to-date and present a fair overview of the literature on the topic. All given links work correctly. Most of the authors of the primary sources are not marginalized individuals, but that might be a constraint given by the small number of academic publishing about the topic.

Images and Media
There are no images in the article. This lack is most apparent in the introductory section, both for a main leading image of the article and for images relevant to the content of the lead section.

Talk
The sole comment in the Talk section voices concerns similar to mine: Lack of information, much of the content being quotes from academic authors, the article being a work-in-progress. The article is rated: Category: Start-Class medicine articles, Category: Low-importance medicine articles, Category: All WikiProject Medicine articles.

Overall
The article sufficiently conveys the core concept and summarizes the main literature on Virgin soil epidemics. It fairly and neutrally represents multiple authors' opinion. That said, the article is incomplete and just slightly larger than a stub. It's structure could be improve with a clearer and descriptive lead section, and subsequent sections for relevant content, e.g. "History", "Epidemiological Modelling", and "Academic Debate". A large fraction of the article concerns itself with academic debate, and it would benefit from more content before the "Debate" section.