User:Chloezampetti/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: (Environmental impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article to evaluate because the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and its environmental impacts are part of the reason I chose this path of study and I am interested in finding and sharing more about how it affects our planet.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, but it could use a bit of doctoring in terms of wording.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Slightly, but it could be more clearly described and laid out
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes talks about petroleum toxicity, but does not have a section for it or go too far into detail
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Could use a bit more detail

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Many of the sources are from upwards of 5 years ago
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I feel that the methane, impact due to clean up, and impact to vegetation sections could use developing,
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No not necessarily

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes this article is neutral, there is no effort to blame it simply states the facts of the impact
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No because they are outdated
 * Are the sources current?
 * No they seem quite outdated
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * A lot of news articles, would like to see more scientific journals
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is not poorly written, however, it could have a less choppy flow
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Yes
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * No, I would like to rework the sections to flow better

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No there is a major lack of graphics
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Captions are nondescript
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No
 * No

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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * No edits since 2017, bulk of edits in 2013
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Large range of information, good presentation of facts
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Need to be more specific in certain sections
 * Needs to flow better and be overall more organized
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * This article is no poorly developed, but it definitely needs work. It is a good starting point

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: