User:ModestMoose123/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]Grimm's hydride displacement law
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]I chose this article because Grimm’s Hydride Displacement Law is an important early concept in the history of medicinal chemistry and bioisosterism. It connects foundational ideas in chemistry to modern drug design, making it a valuable but often overlooked topic. The article’s brevity and lack of development made it a good candidate for critical evaluation and improvement. Assessing it allowed me to apply what I’ve learned about scientific communication and Wikipedia standards. Additionally, I was interested in how older scientific theories are presented and preserved in modern educational resources.
Evaluate the article
[edit]The article on Grimm’s Hydride Displacement Law provides a brief and accurate introduction, defining the law as an early hypothesis to describe bio-isosterism. While the lead clearly identifies the topic, it lacks depth and does not offer an overview of the law’s historical context, significance, or modern relevance. The content is minimal, consisting mainly of a short explanation and a table, with no discussion of the theory’s influence on medicinal chemistry or how it compares to modern bioisosterism concepts. There are no sections to guide the reader, no real-world examples, and no mention of critiques or developments since Grimm’s original proposal.
The article is neutrally written but underdeveloped in nearly every area. It lacks robust, peer-reviewed sources and provides little citation detail. The organization is weak, and the absence of images or explanatory diagrams makes the topic harder to understand. Adding visuals, breaking the content into meaningful sections (e.g., theory, impact, applications), and expanding with current, well-sourced information would greatly enhance the article. Overall, it introduces the topic accurately but falls short as a comprehensive or educational resource.