User:Zkremz/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.

• Name of article: (link) Medical entomology
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

• I chose to evaluate this article because the work I did this summer was heavily involved with insects that impacted human health, such as ticks and mosquitos.

Lead

Guiding questions

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

• The introductory sentence was a very well written sentence that clearly stated the article's topic.

• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

• I believe this aspect is lacking in this article, along with poorly written sentences. These run on sentences are too busy with information and could lead to poor comprehension for the average reader.

• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

• It does. The Lead mentions chemical companies using medical entomologists to develop pesticides, which is not mentioned in the rest of the article.

• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

• I believe the Lead is overly detailed because I consider myself a reader of an above average level compared to the common person, and I had a difficult time sorting all of the information I was reading.

Content

Guiding questions

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

• Yes, but I believe the sections need to be reorganized and more relevant content added than is currently present.

• Is the content up-to-date?

• The content is poorly cited, so it is hard to say how up to date the information is without knowing where/when it was discovered or written.

• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

• There is quite a bit of content missing, such as a section on chemical companies using medical entomologists to develop insecticides. Many citations are also missing.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

• Is the article neutral?

• The article seems to use original conclusions, such as stating a connection between entomology and the resurgence of the bed bug. This information needs to be cited, and not connect A to C.

• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

• I did not find any heavily biased claims.

• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

• I did not find any viewpoints that were over or underrepresented.

• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

• I didn't find any evidence of persuasion tactics in this article.

Sources and References

Guiding questions

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

• No, this article need many citations added.

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

• The few sources they did use seemed to be reliable and accurately reflect available literature.

• Are the sources current?

• About half were current.

• Check a few links. Do they work?

• The links I clicked worked.

Organization

Guiding questions

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

• This article is not easy to read, especially in the Lead due to the run on sentences.

• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

• The article did have quite a few grammatical errors, with some sentences not making sense.

• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

• The article is not organized well enough for Wikipedia standards. It needs some sections combined into one, and others expanded on. An example of this is a few types of insects getting their own section completely.

Images and Media

Guiding questions

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

• The images that are included are useful for understanding.

• Are images well-captioned?

• Yes, they are clearly captioned.

• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

• I believe so, but I can't be sure because they are not cited.

• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

• Yes, I think so.

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

• Conversations on the talk page are limited, and are about editing and errors with information on the page.

• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

• I could not find a rating, and I do not believe it is part of any WikiProjects.

• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

• We have not covered medical entomologists in class, but the information is a lot more broad than other information we've covered in class.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions

• What is the article's overall status?

• This article needs a lot of work with citations, additional information, and organization.

• What are the article's strengths?

• This article had quite a bit of promising information that could be kept with some organizing and citing.

• How can the article be improved?

• This article can be improved with citations, additional information, and organization.

• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

• I would say this article is underdeveloped and poorly developed due to the lack of citations.

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 — ~~~~

• Link to feedback: