User:Alicezha/sandbox

Article Evaluation
The article I choose to look into was for the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.

The article lead does provide a clear overview of the main article content - it gives a good overview of the purpose and background of the Orbiter and its transition into orbital and science phases. It also includes the instruments contained on the craft and its mission usage.

The items in the article are indeed relevant to the article topic - however, personally I would say that there is more detail on the orbital status than needed, but that may be dependent on the author. It could also be the case that I don’t know the significance of the including that information for the general public as well.

The article is neutral throughout - there doesn’t seem to be any claims or frames that seem to be biased towards a particular thought on the mission and usage of the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter.

There aren’t viewpoints that are over-represented/under-represented as the article is quite straightforward in nature. The article properly goes through the instruments used, engineering data, and major discoveries, but doesn’t delve too much into the dispute of discoveries and states some of the current beliefs.

The facts usually have a reference to a scientific article, usually from a reliable space source or from NASA press releases and the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter page - this information is references by an appropriate and reliable reference. These will be neutral sources.

There definitely is information out of date at the latest article used for information was from 2016. There isn’t any information regarding activities from 2017 as of yet.

The links do work for the few citations that I checked, and the sources do support the claims of the article.

The kinds of conversations in the Talk article are mainly about when to begin writing as there are several scientific events going on, debate on the other cameras used, when the will end its journey and stuff like that, and asking about adding new images into the page. They generally just chat with each other as the writers are interested in the Mars Orbiter and like to share their thoughts together.

The article is rated as a GA-class on the project quality scale.

Wikipedia does discuss the topic as though it were an encyclopedia page from a neutral points of view. Additionally, there were numerous authors/editors who respect each other’s edits and work together to change the article for the better. It doesn’t differ from the way we’ve talked about a wikipedia article in class.