User:SpringBio2022/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 this article?
[edit]I have chosen to evaluate this article because it has a C- class rating, meaning it has some missing information and may require some significant cleanup. This makes the article ideal to evaluate and make suggestions. Furthermore, SV40 affects both monkeys and humans. The hypothesis that says SV40 might cause cancer has some controversy in its research. This made me want to learn more about the topic, as well as evaluate the article to help make it an easier and more accurate read.
Evaluate the article
[edit]An article on SV40, a polyomavirus that affects both monkeys and humans. I feel that it is lacking in some sections. Here are my thoughts and suggestions .
- Lead section: This article had a good lead section and gave a clear and concise definition of what SV40 is and why it is important.
- Content: There was a good amount of content that seemed relevant in this article, however, some topics were getting more emphasis than others. I would add more information about the history and well as other animals. Considering monkeys were mentioned in the leading section, I feel as though they should be mentioned in more depth than they were. I think to make the article flow more I would move history to the top, followed by the human disease section and animal section. This allows for more of a background before diving into the cellular/molecular level of how the virus works.
- Images and Media: To enhance this article some figures could be used to help readers have a better understanding. For example, I would add a figure pertaining to the process of reactivation.
- Sources and References: I was impressed to see that the top reference was from PubMed. This is an excellent scholarly source to look into medical related research papers, that have significant data to back their findings.
- Overall impressions: This article is C-class, so it could use some improvements in writing style as well as the information presented. It is a little underdeveloped and many edits were made due to unproven or misleading information brought up in the talk section.