User:Shahr07/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?
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have never heard about DnaA before and i wanted to learn in depth about how and where it is useful and what it has to provide.
Evaluate the article
Lead: The first statement clearly describes the meaning of the topic, and further ahead it gives a short detail about the topic.
Content: The content provided correct information about the topic, was up-to-date, but it does not provides a detailed description.
Tone and Balance: There were no claims that appeared heavy biased.
Sources and References: The information in the article is backed up by reliable sources and links that do work, the references provided are relevant and regarding the topic.
Images and Media: The Article does incudes images that are well-captioned which enhances understanding of the topic.
Talk page Discussion: It is a part of WikiProjects for molecular biology, but didn't include discussion.
Overall Impression: The article is underdeveloped, more information can be added to understand the topic in depth.