User:DR3bbarnes/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

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? (It shouldn't.)
Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

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?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

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?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

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?

Images and Media

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?

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.

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?

Overall impressions

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?

Examples of good feedback

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?

Medical entomology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I chose this article due to my own interests in the study of medicine and the impact other living creatures have on human health. This page matters because insects are never going to disappear, no matter how much some people want them to. Therefore, it is important to understand their lifestyle and how it can impact that of our own. My first impression of the article was that it was extremely educational, especially for those looking to enter the specific field, and well written.

Evaluate the article(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Lead Section

gave a good description about the main topic at hand
discussed veterinary entomology, which was not included much in the rest of the article
gave good background information on how the field has progressed and its importance by various agencies/organizations

Content

content appears to be up-to-date
article contains various subjects that are related to the topic, notably the most common insects that transmit diseases, what diseases can be transmitted through these vectors, and where both are most commonly found

Tone and Balance

article is written with a neutral stance
professional
viewpoints are equally represented

Sources and References

links are accessible and direct to notable pages, such as government agencies and peer-reviewed articles
sources are thorough, concise, and written by authors with various backgrounds
contains many in text citations that are well placed and useful
may need a few newer sources

Organization and Writing Quality

article is clear and easy to read
broken down into important topics and equal attention is mostly given to each; "Cockroach" could have a bit more research done and information added
little to no spelling or grammatical errors were noted

Images and Media

2 images available
captions and images adhere to the sites standards
caption on Mosquito could have a bit more information (such as its common name rather than simply its scientific name)
images laid out in a visibly appealing format

Talk Page Discussion

conversations include updates that have been made to the article and other suggestions on what can be added/fixed (i.e. grammar/spelling and additional sources that can be added)
article appears to be rated well; does not appear to be a part of any Wikiprojects

Overall Impressions

article seems slightly underdeveloped; can use more resources and general information on the topic
sources may need to be updated/insert new findings
various diseases that can be spread are discussed, whether major or minor ones, and this can be extremely helpful
overall, the article may need a few touchups, but it is strong in major topics, the importance of the field, and how/which diseases can be spread through insect vectors