User talk:Moriahgonzales3/Evaluate an Article

Name of article: JoGayle Howard

Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose to evaluate this article after reading the initial description of JoGayle Howard stating that she specialized in captive breeding of species. I study environmental studies and I have read many articles of captive breeding in the last few years. – Moriahgonzales3 (talk) 23:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC) === Lead === ;

Guiding questions

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? ** Yes *

Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? ** No *

Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? ** No *

Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? ** Concise ==== Lead evaluation ==== The lead was short and concise but it did not include all the information that is present in the article. The lead should have included the techniques for artificial insemination that she used. === Content === ;

Guiding questions

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? ** Yes *

Is the content up-to-date? ** No * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? ** Yes ==== Content evaluation ==== The article's content is relevant to the topic but there could have been more information on her accomplishments and awards rather than just stating her awards. The article did not go into detail about some of the subjects stated in the lead. There was also a lengthy quote that did belong. === Tone and Balance === ;

Guiding questions *

Is the article neutral? ** Yes *

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? ** No *

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? ** Yes *

Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? ** Yes ==== Tone and balance evaluation ==== The tone and balance were slightly biased towards artificial insemination of animals and endangered species by using quotes from JoGayle Howard on her practices. === Sources and References === ;

Guiding questions

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? ** No *

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? ** Yes *

Are the sources current? ** Yes *

Check a few links. Do they work? ** Yes ==== Sources and references evaluation ==== Not all of the facts stated in the article had a source for the information. While the article itself is not that biased, some of the sources I checked were much more biased. === Organization === ;

Guiding questions *

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? ** Yes *

Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? ** Yes *

Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? ** Yes ==== Organization evaluation ==== The article was easy to read, however there were many grammatical errors in sentence structure and punctuation. The article is broken down in an easy to read way but some of the sentences were simply not well written. === Images and Media === ;

Guiding questions *

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? ** There were no images except the one of JoGayle Howard as the cover * Are images well-captioned? ** Yes * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? ** Yes * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? ** Yes ==== Images and media evaluation ==== There were no images other than the one of JoGayle Howard as the cover photo for her. It was well captioned and exciting. === Checking the talk page === ; Guiding questions * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? ** There are no conversations * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? ** It is apart of WikiProjects Women Scientists and is rated as a start class article with mid-importance. * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? ** We have not really talked about endangered species or captive breeding in class. ==== Talk page evaluation ==== The talk page had no conversation but is considered apart of WikiProjects for women in science. === Overall impressions === ; Guiding questions * What is the article's overall status? ** It is considered to be of mid relevance to the women of science WikiProject, but I enjoyed the article and think it's relevant to captive breeding. * What are the article's strengths? ** The structure of the article was good and it was easy to read. * How can the article be improved? ** Different parts of the article should be removed while others should go more in depth of the topic. The grammar and structure of sentences could use some work. * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? ** It is underdeveloped. It needs some work but could be a strong article. ==== Overall evaluation ==== === 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 — Moriahgonzales3 (talk) 23:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)