User:Johannakhb/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) Molecular Genetics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_genetics
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have selected this article because it is an area of interest in my graduate program and I am currently taking a class on molecular genetics.

Lead

Guiding questions:

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation

The lead section’s introductory sentence links two concepts, “molecular biology and genetics,” in hopes of providing an explanation of the field of molecular genetics. The citation source used for that introduction actually has an excellent description of molecular genetics as an ‘investigative approach” that was excluded from the lead section and should be included. The lead section has a contents box to present the article’s individual sections, but doesn’t actually describe the sections. The closing sentence of the lead section delineates the relevance and importance of the study of molecular genetics. Overall, the lead section is very concise, but missing relevant information to clearly explain the study of molecular genetics.

Content

Guiding questions:

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
Is the content up-to-date?
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation

The content may be relevant to the topic, but it comes across as disjointed and incomplete. Particularly in the Technique section, the overarching goal and the rationale for using the individual techniques is not stated. There are techniques missing like RNAi, which is mentioned, but not explained, in a later section on genetic screens that should be included in that section. Gene therapy is quickly summarized in a section but does not discuss the ethics or limitations. Then, there is a section on the Human Genome Project that lists the goals of the project, but not how the information gleaned from that project is being used today.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation

While the article trends towards neutrality and doesn’t try to persuade the reader one way or the other, the lack of discussion about the ethics and limitations of gene therapy makes the article biased in favor of gene therapy as an “appealing” and successful technique. One should note that the article does state that gene therapy is “still in development” and “mostly used in research settings”, which also might lead a reader to question the reasons that gene therapy is not widely available to the public.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

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

Sources and references evaluation

Some of the facts in the article are backed up by reliable secondary sources, but some article content is missing citations. Within the present citations, two of the sources do not have a working link (6, & 14), one source appears to be the protocol from a Qiagen kit (5), and one appears to be summary notes that one might be given in class and has no source (7). One of the citations references a source that provides an excellent definition of the study of molecular genetics, which should have been used in the lead sentence and was not included (1). That same source then focuses on a philosophical discussion of the concept of molecular genetics for the duration of the article and the discussion is not included in the Wikipedia article. The sources may have been current at the time of the original article production, and although a great deal of research has been conducted since, there is currently a dearth of secondary and tertiary sources that would be valuable in improving this article. However, a summary article on NCBI, “Molecular genetics made simple,” would be a great reference (Kassem et al., 2012).

Organization

Guiding questions:

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation

The article is concise and does seem to utilize verbiage that is comprehensible to the average individual. There are no spelling issues, but multiple grammatical errors are present (e.g. patients should be patient’s). Although multiple sections exist that should be included, the order of the sections might be improved.

Images and Media

Guiding questions:

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
Are images well-captioned?
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation

No images are included in the article to provide pictorial examples of content that might aid comprehension.

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions:

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation

After the initial comments by the instructor to the student originally writing the article in 2007, there is very little talk about the article and very few edits. Molecular genetics has been rated a C-class article because it requires cleanup in the form of more citations, as well as additional content material. The topic falls under the WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology/Genetics and has been given top priority for elaboration and improvement. The article discusses some topics covered in our class, like forward and reverse genetic screens as well as techniques used in the laboratory (e.g. molecular cloning, sequence analysis, and RNAi).

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

What is the article's overall status?
What are the article's strengths?
How can the article be improved?
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation

The article’s strength is that it provides a platform for further dissemination of information about the topic. Unfortunately, “this article needs additional citations for verification” and the paragraph on gene therapy should be re-written in the author’s own words (8). This underdeveloped article on molecular genetics could be improved by including more content, with relevant pictures, in a thoughtfully organized manner with relevant 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:

How is molecular genetics an investigative approach to heredity? ~~~~ Johannakhb