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

• Name of article: Sinlge Nucleotide Polymorphism
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
  • This is a C class article in my field of interest that I feel I can contribute to.

Guiding questions

• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
  • Yes, there is a strong definition for the concept.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
  • It vaguely references it, but the sections are not clearly defined outside of the table of contents.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
  • Other than references to similar topics, no.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • The lead is fair but feels slightly repetitive and not generalized.

Guiding questions

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
  • Yes, with some extraneous info.
• Is the content up-to-date?
  • Yes.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • There is some information that feels unnecessary for a wikipedia page.

Guiding questions

• Is the article neutral?
  • Yes.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
  • None.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
  • None.
• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
  • No.

Guiding questions

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
  • Yes.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
  • Yes
• Are the sources current?
  • Mostly
• Check a few links. Do they work?
  • Yes.

Guiding questions

• Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
  • The article is a bit wordy and repetitive.
• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
  • I did not notice any major spelling or grammatical errors.
• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
  • The article's organization is good but I feel could be better.

Guiding questions

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
  • Not really, only 2.
• Are images well-captioned?
  • No.
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
  • As I far as I am aware.
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
  • Due to the lack of images, it's difficult to say.

Guiding questions

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
  • There is an equal amount of relevant discussions and irrelevant discussion to the topic. A lot on clarification of facts and definitions.
• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
  • C. Yes, this semester and last year.
• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
  • Wikipedia explains the topic in a way anyone could understand and recognize, whereas in class the students are expected to understand high level vocabulary.

Guiding questions

• What is the article's overall status?
  • Wordy and unconcise.
• What are the article's strengths?
  • Good amount of information.
• How can the article be improved?
  • Streamlining the information and present it in a more easily digestible way.
• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
  • Underdeveloped.

• 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:

~~~~