User talk:Editholmeda/sandbox

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? yes everything seems to be relevant to the article topic, however, some of the details are very vague and seem to have the right idea but dont have enough information to really show the significance of the fruit fly.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? It does seem like no one really has been working on Dorsophila for a while. I feel there there are more experiments done that show the importance of using Drosophila as a model species for genetic analysis. I feel like there should be a more descriptive section for both the female and male descriptions. they need to elaborate on the noble prizes about the discoveries using Drosophila. All the sections could use more information and details.

What else could be improved? All the sections could use more information and details. It could also elaborate on the different types of mutations.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, the article is very neutral with very concise and accurate information. No biased other than the fact that Drosophila is a good species to study in terms of genetics. Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented? The viewpoints that were written about was enough information but I think there wasn't enough information about it's ecological fitness and role within the environment.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? yes the links work. the source does support the claims in the article.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Some writers are asking for help to find citations for particular information and others are trying to see why some sections are heavily devoted while others are vague. Others are just discussing how accurate the information is in terms of the citations. How is the article rated? Is it a part of any Wiki Projects? The article is rated B-rated. It is part of the Wikiprojects insects ans wikiprojects genetics. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It is very informational but no very different from learning or talking about it in class. It obvious tha teachers might use wiki to reference talking about fruit flies. But the only big difference is that wiki is information compiled by people that have took the time to research and learn about Drosopila.