User:Af34966/sandbox

Article evaluation

Climate of Titan


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Everything seems relevant to the topic. The images were also relevant.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Yes, there was one particularly noteworthy citation [22] from 2007 that referred to 2010 as being in the future. A follow up on the claim made on the validity of the prediction would be an improvement.
 * What else could be improved?
 * There are many references to the spacecraft Cassini, which is never formally introduced, linked or defined.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article is neutral and mostly factual, there doesn't appear to be any strong positions to be biased toward.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, the science is accounted for.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * There is a whole paragraph in the "Seasons" section without a citation. Some links are to articles I do not have access too, or must pay for. The ones that work do support the article.
 * 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?
 * Some links are to news articles that got their information from scientific articles that could've been cited directly.
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There doesn't seem to be much discussion.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-class or mid-importance. Part of Solar System and Meteorology WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?