User:Domoerlic123/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: I have chosen this article to evaluate as sustainability is a progressive factor of society and has a growing effect on the environment and the health of the planet itself. Sustainability ties to all aspects of society whether it be directly related or not. It is beginning to consume the news, and it is important to differentiate the truths and false information that is being fed through media networks such as the news and social media platforms.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

Looking at the lead for the wikipedia article on sustainability, it does begin with an introductory sentence that is concise and clear and sums up the article in short. The lead does include a brief description of the articles sections, displaying all the information that is seen in the lead within the article itself. The lead is straight to the point and concise.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it does have an introductory sentence that describes the article in short.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * All the information in the Lead is seen within the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise and straight to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article itself does a good job of delivering relevant information, although sustainability being such a rapidly developing concept, I believe that there could have been a greater amount of information and statistics, it seems very surface level.The content is relevant but it does have some updating needed. Sustainability is an ever-changing domain, meaning that the information of the page needs to be constantly refurbished to keep up with the relevancy of sustainability. All the content on the page belongs and ties to sustainability, although as previously stated more information could be added and constantly looked over as sustainability is a rapid ever-changing domain.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article itself does a good job of delivering relevant information, although sustainability being such a rapidly developing concept, I believe that there could have been a greater amount of information and statistics.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content is relevant but it does have some updating needed. Sustainability is an ever-changing domain, meaning that the information of the page needs to be constantly refurbished to keep up with the relevancy of sustainability.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * All the content on the page belongs and ties to sustainability, although as previously stated more information could be added and constantly looked over as sustainability is a rapid ever-changing domain.

Content evaluation
Tone and Balance


 * Guiding questions

The article does remain neutral, with its facts and statistics, though it does display the negative effects that can arise neglecting the seriousness of sustainability.That being said the article doesn't dive far enough into sustainability to even give a strong argument for or against, it is very surface level as stated above. Bias is not extreme within in this article, although as stated above the article does make known the effects. There could be more information present within this article, there is definitely an under-representation of information and persuasion regarding the topic of the article; sustainability.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article does remain neutral, with its facts and statistics, though it does display the negative effects that can arise neglecting the seriousness of sustainability.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Bias is not extreme within in this article although as stated above the article does make known the effects.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * there decently could be more information present within this article, but no information  is over or under represented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favour of one position or away from another?
 * The article, keeping away from persuasion.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The facts of the article have sources from which the information is backed up and supported, though the amount of information is little and the sources are surface level. The sources are various, though they are basic, but all connect and support the main cause; sustainability.The sources range although the most current ones are from 2018, which is fairly close to 2020 although a lot can change within two years, especially with the concepts of sustainability. Confirmation that the links of the sources do work.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The facts of the article havesources from which the information is backed up.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are from various landscapes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources range although the most current ones are from 2018, which is fairly close to 2020 although a lot can change within two years, especially with the concepts of sustainability.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes they work

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is written with punctual grammar and is easy to read. There are no spelling errors or grammar mistakes. The overall organization of the article is good, although the article is not long.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is written with punctual grammar and is easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There are no spelling errors or grammar mistakes
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * the overall organization of the article is good, although the article is not long.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article only has two images one of the earth and one of a graph. The images are both captioned, with clear explanations of what they are/intend. Both images adhere to copyright regulations. The images add substance to the article due to the limited amount of writing, the two pictures balance the literature. Although it is very surface level images and literature.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article only has two images one of the earth and one of a graph.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * the images are both captioned, with clear explanations of what they are/intend.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * yes they do
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images add substance to the article. Due to the limited amount of writing, the to pictures balance the literature. Although it is very surface level images and literature.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There is minimal conversation on the talk page, discussing various forms/concepts of sustainability.The article has been rated Stub-Class, on the projects quality skill. The way Wikipedia discusses the topic differs from in class conversation as this page does not go in depth but rather surface level analyzation and discussion.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There is minimal conversation on the talk page, discussing various forms/concepts of sustainability.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article has been rated Stub-Class, on the projects quality skill
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The way Wikipedia discusses the topic differs from in class conversation as this page does not go in depth but rather surface level analyzation and discussion.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The status of the article is very surface level, basic. The information is all relevant, although no substance or extra examination is discussed. First off the article needs more literature. It needs more supporting points and it also could benefit from more statistics. The article is not complete, although the information is all feasible and fairly current, there is much needed in order for this article to be a viable source of information to the reader.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The status of the article is very surface level, basic.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The information is all relevant, although no substance or extra examination is discussed.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * First off the article needs more literature. It needs. more supporting points and it also could benefit from more statistics.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is not complete, although the information is all feasible and fairly current, there is much needed in order for this article to be a viable source of information to the reader.