User:Mary-Fe.Gipe/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Yes, the introductory sentence includes the organisms class and phylum.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
Yes, the Lead includes the taxonomy, anatomy, and ecology. it also mentions where they are found.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
No, everything in the Lead is also present in the article.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
The Lead is not overly detailed. it contains general information about corals.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
Yes,everything included in the article is relevant to coral.
Is the content up-to-date?
The last revision was done yesterday, which indicates that the article's content is relatively up to date.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Yes, the article is missing information about coral's importance to marine biodiversity.

Is the article neutral?
Yes, the article only contains factual information.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
No, everything is neutral and factually based.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
the importance of coral to marine biodiversity is underrepresented.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
No, the article in neutral and does not try to persuade the reader of anything.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Yes, all sources of information are either primary or secondary.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Yes, the sources are thorough and scientific.
Are the sources current?
Some sources are current but others are more that 15 years old.
Check a few links. Do they work?
Yes, the links that I checked worked.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
The article is easy to read and straight forward.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
The article is free of spelling and grammatical errors.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Yes, the article is well organized and broken into helpful sections.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
Yes, the article includes a variety of images that enhance the understanding of the content.
Are images well-captioned?
Yes, the images are captioned with a description of the picture.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
Yes, the pictures are not copyrighted.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
Yes, but it would be helpful if the pictures were bigger to see more detail.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
There are no current conversations going on about this topic. The last comment made on this page was in 2013. The last comment about this page was about the growth rates of coral.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
The article is rated GA. It is part of WikiProjects Marine Life and WikiProjects Animal anatomy.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
We have not talked about this topic in class yet.

What is the article's overall status?
The article is rated as a level-4 vital article in Biology.
What are the article's strengths?
This article provides a lot of general information about coral with many linking to extend the information about the topic.
How can the article be improved?
I think it is very important to include the importance of coral to marine biodiversity.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
This article is extremely developed.

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 — ~~~~