User:Davie0210/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: Solar power plants in the Mojave Desert
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This is just a form of renewal energy in the United States.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is detailed but not too complex to read.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes and no.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The viewpoint from animals could be talked about it’s not mentioned much in this article to you.
 * 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? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? They are semi current the newest one coming from 2016.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes and I did not see much of those who would be marginalized.
 * 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? Where are you who doesn’t know much about the solar panels in the Mojave it was pretty clear and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I did not notice any.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes. I like the subsections it is broken down into.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? It really isn’t in conversation going on for this afternoon.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? I did not see a reading on it and it is not a part of any WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Do do not recall us discussing sure panels in specific in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It was a good article about one of our solar panel locations in the US and it is something I would like to see more broadly using our country.
 * What are the article's strengths? I like that it was short sweet and to the point since this is just about one specific location so it wasn’t too complicated to read.
 * How can the article be improved? I would have light for more information on how the wildlife is affected too have been included in the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? For it just being over the Mojave desert it was well developed in my opinion.

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: