User:Bohne086/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Environmental studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose it because it is relevant to my own studies. It matters because the environment affects the biosphere, atmosphere, habitats, climate, and more. My preliminary impression is that it is a well-written article.

Evaluate the article
The content in the article is relevant to the article topic and not distracting. The information is updated, but there are topics missing that could be added in more detail. The article is very neutral, and the talk section has people describing how neutral and unbiased it is. The history portion is overrepresented. The links in the article work and are relevant to the topic. There are plenty of citations, and facts are supported by references. The section that is depleted of citations is the education section in which there are facts stated with no citations. The reference list is reliable and appropriate. The sources are from academic journals and other reliable sources which are neutral. There is a diverse array of authors and publications. The article is rated stub-class and start-class by three different WikiProjects as well as high importance. The talk section shows people discussing that it is informative and factual. The lead section defines the topic well and gives a good overview as well as has a good introductory sentence. It does not include descriptions of the major sections. The article is not persuasive. There is a lot more literature on the topic than is presented on this page. There is a diverse spectrum of source and authors including CollegeBoard and academic journal publication authors. It is concise, clear, and easy to read. The grammar is good as well as organization. The sections reflect major points of the topic, but there could be a lot more such as a policy section. There could be more academic journals involved in the discussion. The images are only of one school, so they are not very helpful. The caption is good, and the image is well-placed. The article is underdeveloped.