User:XTH987/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: (Sleep and metabolism)
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- I have chosen this article to evaluate because I am very interested in how sleep affects the whole person (psychologically, physically, emotionally, etc.).

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes, the first sentence addresses both sleep and metabolism which are the two main elements of the article.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- The Lead does not include a brief description of the article's main sections. However, there is a table of contents that lists the major topics that will be discussed.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- No. The lead does not address sleep deprivation, type II diabetes, and appetite control; these are the major topics Iisted in the Table of Contents and discussed in the article.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- The lead is very concise, and could probably include more information to address the major topics that will be discussed in the article.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes, the article discusses sleep deprivation, type II diabetes, and appetite control which are related to sleep and metabolism.
Is the content up-to-date?
- Yes, the content appears up-to-date; the sources cited are from 2010 and 2011. However, the article could definitely use some additional citations with more recent research.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- I think it would be important to include more information about the research that has come out regarding sleep deprivation and weight-gain.
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
- No. This would definitely be an important topic to discuss because food-inequity is a problem that affects underserved populations and diet quality impacts both sleep and metabolism functioning.

Is the article neutral?
- Yes, the article does not appear to take any particular stance.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- No, the article appears to be fairly neutral.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- The viewpoint that sleep deprivation negatively impacts appetite control and weight is predominant. It might be important to include some counter research, though this may be challenging since the bulk of the research does support this finding. It might be interesting to not how short term sleep deprivation can improve depressive symptoms (though this may not be directly related to the article topic).
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- No.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes, each finding is cited by a reputable journal.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- The sources cited are thorough; however, the article could probably use more citations given that there are only five in the references.
Are the sources current?
- The sources are fairly current (2010 and 2011). However, the article would benefit from sources that are more current, within the last five years.
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Yes, the sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors, however, the article could benefit from more diversity in terms of both authors and inclusion of historically marginalized individuals. The studies do not make it clear whether or not historically marginalized individuals were included in the studies.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes, the links work.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes, the article is concise, clear and easy to read. the article does a good job of defining "scientific jargon" while using more everyday language when possible.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Not that I could see.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes, the article is organized into clear section that reflect the Table of Contents.

- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
  - There is little conversation, if any, on the Talk page. There are only two comments (including mine) and no replies.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- The article is part of the follow WikiProjects: WikiProject Psychology, WikiProject Medicine, WikiProject Neuroscience, WikiProject Physiology.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- We have not discussed this topic in class.

What is the article's overall status?
- The article appears to be a "start-class" article and thus, could use some work to make it more reliable and comprehensive.
What are the article's strengths?
- The article's strength's are the clear and concise sections.
How can the article be improved?
- The article could be improved by including more updated sources that include historically underrepresented populations in the studies.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- The article could also be improved by including more detail in the Lead and also more information on the topic of sleep and metabolism as a whole. The article seems to be missing recent research on this topic and lacks enough detail to make it reliable and comprehensive.

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 — ~~~~