User:Dngo1023/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 ethics
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. It is related to my thesis work and climate change class

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? I am unsure
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * What else could be improved


 * Almost everything in the article is relevant to the article topic. I think one thing distracted me the most is when the paragraph started to mention Christianity and how the environmental ethics are derived from the bible. I think there are many missing parts couple be added to the article. For example, John Muir played a big part of the environmental ethics starting points. The article needs to include more historical figures. There are many claims that need to be cited or lack of sources. For example, under "Humanist theorists", the section seems to be very short compare to other content.
 * Almost everything in the article is relevant to the article topic. I think one thing distracted me the most is when the paragraph started to mention Christianity and how the environmental ethics are derived from the bible. I think there are many missing parts couple be added to the article. For example, John Muir played a big part of the environmental ethics starting points. The article needs to include more historical figures. There are many claims that need to be cited or lack of sources. For example, under "Humanist theorists", the section seems to be very short compare to other content.

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?

The article doesn't seem to be neutral. Under the "Applied Theory" section, it leans heavily toward Christianity. The content links many historical figures to God's doing without explaining a lot of who they are and their work. Again, although the article mentions many names, there is a lack of explanation of their roles and their impacts on environmental ethics

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

When I checked a few citations, some links did not work. Therefore, the source did not support the question was raised in the article. One source was not a reliable reference. Because when I clicked on the link, it took me to a blog page. Which the article on the blog page does not have any reliable reference also. For example, this was one of the source  https://www.wired.com/2003/12/global-warming-killing-thousands/. This is not a neutral source when it lacks of providing scientific data to present the materials. There are many claims that did not get backed up by sources.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I am not a strong writer, therefore I had some trouble with editing
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes

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?

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?

The article is part of the WikiProject Environment. This article is rated as Start-Class. The conversations are going on in this topic is should the Darwinism- survival of the fittest be included in the topic or help us to define environmental ethics. I think the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class is that the Wikipedians are voiding each other's opinions. They may many claims in their discussion without providing sources.

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?

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: