User:CBrisbois/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

Name of article: Eklutna Glacier

I chose this article because it is relevant to my thesis research, water resources, and there is lots of room for improvement.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead is short and concise, beginning with an introductory sentence that defines the article topic. The rest of the lead outlines the two main subjects relating to the importance of the glacier: glacial runoff contributing to Anchorage's water reservoir and the loss of glacier area with climate change. As this is the only paragraph in the article, these two topics serve as a good starting point for sections to add and incorporate details and references on.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The content is up-to-date and relevant but needs to be expanded on with more specific details. There could be a whole section describing the type of glacier Eklutna is with details about its two branches, broad upper basin, elevation range, size and length, annual precipitation and climate info, among other facts. The thinning and shrinking of the glacier should also be addressed in a separate section. Recreation and access could be added since Eklutna glacier is part of the Eklutna Traverse.

The statement "The glacier is the source of most of Anchorage's drinking water..." should be revised because it is misleading. The source of most of Anchorage's drinking water is Eklutna Lake which receives inflow from a large basin including other streams and snowmelt, of which Eklutna Glacier runoff contributes a portion of the total inflow to the lake. This subject should not be overlooked though because monitoring Eklutna Glacier's decreasing volume runoff implications is important for planning and management of the Eklutna Lake watershed.

One topic that could be added in terms of underrepresented populations is the history of the glacier and its effects in relation to the Dena'ina, or just acknowledgement of the land. Or, what is the Dena'ina name for Eklutna Glacier?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral and only presents facts. I am going to pay very close attention to balance of the article contributions I make due to my experience and research background with the glacier. For example, I shouldn't add a huge section about APU's Eklutna glacier research or my own field work experiences.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
There are two sources for this article. The main facts presented in the article are sourced to a newspaper article from Anchorage Daily News. There is no link to the exact article, only a link to the wikipedia page for the newspaper. I know these facts exist in primary sources like journal articles that could be added to improve the references section. The other source used for Eklutna Glacier's identifying info is from USGS Geographic Names Information Systems (GNIS) feature information. This is a good source as GNIS contains official geographic feature names managed under federal and national standards for geographic nomenclature.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article contains none of these components of organization because it is only one paragraph. I look forward to adding some organization. Here are some ideas for possible sections to include:

Geography (or Glaciology)

History

Retreat

Water Resources

Research

Recreation/Access

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There is only one aerial image of Eklutna Glacier that is dated to 1964. A more recent image should be added but the historic photo should be retained for comparison of glacier area. There are two good repeat photos of the Eklutna Glacier terminus that can be added to show retreat. A location map identifying where Eklutna Glacier is located within Alaska would be informative as well.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
There are no conversations or posts in the talk page but the article is part of the WikiProject Alaska, WikiProject Glaciers, and WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography. The article is rated as Stub Class by all WikiProjects listed.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
The article is "stub" status because it only has one paragraph. However, the paragraph does introduce some key topics related to the glacier that will be good to expand on. The article can be improved simply by adding content. It is an underdeveloped article, however not poorly developed.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: