User:2607:F140:6000:B:9D5A:3E00:2F7D:1B74/sandbox

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
The section about climate forcing is a bit awkward to read - it has odd grammar and a few glaring typos. The first few sentences of the whole article do not give a great overall picture of the topic.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
To the best of my (limited) knowledge, there is no bias in this article.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Not that I could notice.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
The links worked, and the 3 sources that I verified appear to be of the same character and intent as the information used from them.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
It is easy to see where every fact is from. Most information appears to come from published scientific journals or other scholarly sources, such as graduate-level academic papers.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
Nothing is out of date. A few sections (eg. The introductory sentences, "climate forcing, and "first atmosphere") could use some more information.

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
There are some comments about the citations being sub-par. These have been addressed and presumably corrected. There are some unaddressed concerns about the low volume of content, especially in the sections I mentioned in the previous question.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
It is rated as C-class, and is part of environment, geology, geography, and history of sciences.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
This is not something we have discussed in class. It is relevant to my group's and my project, and interesting to evaluate because it is flagged on Wikipedia as being a bit flawed.