User:Dlerma24/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: Sustainability studies
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Sustainability studies correlates with ethical consumerism which is more relevant to our topic of study.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly states what the topic is and includes a hyperlink for the word 'sustainability'. The Lead includes a brief description of the interdisciplinary topics of Sustainability studies but much of it is not included in the body of the article. In no way is the Lead overly detailed.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * The article's content is very brief and only includes a mild history of the shift towards sustainable focus/design. The content could be updated as it only references a shift in sustainable focus in the 1980s..I have a gut feeling older information on this topic could be found. There are some contemporary sources used dated 2018, but much could be added, for example a small snippet on the United States withdrawal from the Paris Agreement could be tasteful. However, the only real body section of the article veers off into a topic about global warming, rather than the topic the title suggests (The shift towards sustainability). I would consider this to be an underrepresented topic but quite frankly I am unsure of how much literature exists on sustainability studies.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions
 * The article starts neutral but by the final paragraph of the first section it appears to have developed a sense of urgency towards following the Paris Agreement. To answer the last these questions in one blow.. the entire last paragraph once again is flooded with statements that clearly display the authors bias. Though many of the sentences are properly cited the composition of them displays a lot of emotion. This is particularly exhausting since the body topic is meant to be a historiography section of sustainability studies.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * No, not all the facts are backed up by reliable secondary sources. There are a few rather weak articles that could be made stronger by support from a few more credible sources, however, alone they are unreliable. One newspaper article was written in 2016 and when accessing the link a banner appears stating, "Warning! This article is more than 2 years old." I would deem that article outdated and in need of an update even if the information is still relevant. Fortunately, all the links in the references section work but aren't very impressive. Much of the articles are either weak news articles or from a Universities 'about' page for the sustainability studies major. References and sourcing could use some help!!


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * This article does not contain many grammatical or spelling error but could use some editing to make the information a bit more digestible and less choppy. The organization is 'okay' but could use more sections and depth.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * No, to all of the questions. The title image is a photograph taken from space of the earth. The only other accompanying photo is a graph that is not very easy on the eyes. It would definitely take some thought to find some good images for this topic, but there are surely some less generic ones out there. The addition of more topics would provide a space for more interesting images.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions
 * There are not any conversations on this talk page. The article is park of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment and is rated Stub-Class.


 * 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
 * I would assess this article as incomplete. More information is necessary for this to be a worth while Wikipedia article. The article attempts to share information on a new topic of study but does not provide nearly enough depth for a firm grasp of what it is. The article really just needs more information and more credible sources.


 * 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?

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: