User:Dlatta/Evaluate an Article
 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA 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.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia 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.
Sources and ReferencesA 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.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe 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.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA 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. |
Which article are you evaluating?
[edit]Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]It is a C-class article that I am evaluating and updating for this Wiki Project. It is also a combination of two topics that I am interested in (conservation biology and genetics).
Evaluate the article
[edit]Lead Section - The lead is concise and offers a good definition and explanation about what conservation genetics is and the topics that are discussed in the rest of the page.
Content - The article content is relevant to the topic and seems mostly up to date to my knowledge. There is potentially content missing from the applications section as it seems quite small.
Tone and Balance - The tone of the article is very neutral and I found no evidence of attempts at persuasion or arguing sides.
Sources and References - The links to the sources work and seem up to date. Sources are thorough but there does seem to be a couple of sentences that could benefit from being followed up by a source.
Organization - Article is easy to read with no visible spelling errors and seems to flow in a way that makes sense to the reader.
Images - There is one image in the article that briefly introduces genetics that is visually appealing and enhances the article.
Talk Page - This article was a part of another student editors Wiki Project in 2022. Conversations behind the scenes talk about a potential article name change, updating sources, and improving content.
Overall Impression - This articles overall status is C-class. Its strengths is that it is a growing topic/field so it can constantly be improved and updated, this however, can also be a downfall because it needs to be constantly updated to stay current with research and the growing conservation genetics field. The article seems currently underdeveloped, but I do believe that is because it is a more recent field of science.