User:Ajmellquist/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The article I am evaluating is environmental studies.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article to evaluate because I am interested in environmental studies, and feel that it is a growing field. It matters since we all live on the earth and must realize our impact. My preliminary impression is that it is well-linked, but brief.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section
The lead section does include a concise introductory sentence, and only includes the sections discussed below: history and education. This section is quite elaborate since it claims environmental studies is formed by many disciplines and provides a long lists of these disciplines. However, I don't think it's too detailed. It presents a full picture of what environmental studies is made up of.

Content
It appears that the article's content is all relevant, but the "top universities worldwide for environmental studies" section could be updated from 2020 to 2021. There does not appear to be any missing content but the article is relatively short, so could be lengthened. Personally I am not too well-versed on the topic, so not sure what it would be missing.

Tone and Balance
The article appears neutral, although the university ranking from college board is something that could be considered arguable. Minority viewpoints aren't necessarily considered, but I am not sure what that would be in this context. Generally, this article does a good job not persuading the reader and stays neutral.

Sources and References
The sources all appear to be credible and current, however the College Board sources may be more questionable since that is a company instead of a study. The references appear to be thorough and diverse. For instance, the first reference is from what appears to be an environmental textbook. Other sources include to be the best source as well, such as the Institute of Education Sciences. The links do work correctly.

Organization and Quality Writing
The article is well-written and easy to follow. It is easily broken up into just two sections, making it simple to understand. There does not appear to be any grammatical or spelling errors.

Images and Media
The article only includes one image of the earth, which is fitting for the topic of environmental studies and laid out in a visually appealing way. There is a descriptive but concise caption on the photo and it does follow Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

Talk Page Discussion
There is some discussion around whether to include human ecology for interaction clarification and what the focus of environmental studies is. The article is rated stub-class in the WikiProject Environment and WikiProject Education, and start-class in the WikiProject Higher education. The discussion is slightly different that the way I was taught since there aren't ":"'s used for replies.

Overall Impressions
The article is overall informative, concise, and neutral. It also has many links helping show the interdisciplinary aspects of environmental studies. It could be improved by updating the College Board ratings. II think the article is well-developed but could benefit from more sections.