User:Elizreece/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
I am evaluating this article because it is the article that I will be editing for my project. I chose Clear Lake as my topic because my grandparents lived in Lakeport when I was growing up and I have fond memories of visiting them. One of my siblings currently lives in the area, and I continue to visit regularly. It has been disappointing to see the environmental problems the area deals with and I am eager to learn more about them.


 * Name of article: Clear Lake (California)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.


 * Guiding questions

The Lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. I think the Lead describes some of the topics of the article, but not all. It does include information that is not present in the article such as information about a bass fishing record. I think the Lead provides too much detail regarding bass fishing that would be better focused in the body content (if included at all). The bulk of the Lead discusses the Clear Lake fauna without giving equal weight to other issues that are covered in the article.


 * 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 content of the article is largely relevant, but there are unnecessary items included, such as providing names of wineries in the area. The information does not seem to be particularly up-to-date. Most items cited are from 2014 or 2015. The article makes no mention of the recent major fires in the area or the effect of Clear Lake's natural fire regime on its ecology. I think the historical geology section is also incomplete. It also only briefly touches on the natural eutrophication and nutrient cycling of the lake, or its related wetlands.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

While many of the items in the article are neutral, it occasionally veers toward bias, both in favor and against. One such instance includes the use of quotation marks around phrases that do not necessarily need quotes. The use of quotes implies that the information is not true. The focus on the fauna of the area seems biased toward fishing and hunting. The article does attempt to persuade occasionally. It uses unnecessarily emotional language with regard to the interactions between settlers and native groups, without providing much background information regarding native groups in the area. In other sections the tone seems too complimentary of the area, and cites sources such as the chamber of commerce.


 * 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

Not all the facts are backed up by reliable sources. Statements are frequently made in this article without substantive citation to back them up. I don't think the sources reflect the available literature on the topic. For instance they reference the county tourism website for geologic information about the area when there are numerous governmental sources (such as USGS) that can provide better information. Other sources, such as Rachel Caron's Silent Spring seem important, but the ideas are not fully fleshed out. Most of the information is relatively current, but could stand to be updated. I checked about 10 of the links, and they appear to be functional.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

While I think it is generally easy to read, I do think that the style leaves something to be desired. A more neutral tone in some spots would be beneficial as well. I didn't note any grammar or spelling errors, the issues are more to do with style. I think that the article is currently organized, but the organization could be better laid out to flow easier for the reader. A better breakdown of subsections would benefit the article as well.


 * 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

It does include some good images and some other images that are not of great quality. For the most part, the captions are clear, though some could be more descriptive. I believe the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. I think that the layout could be improved. With the exception of one image, they are currently all on the side of the article.


 * 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

In the Talk section there are debates about the age of the lake, and some users objecting to chamber of commerce content being included in the article A user requested a specific type of photo. The article is part of both WikiProject California and WikiProject Lakes. It is rated as a "Start Class" article. We haven't discussed this article in class, some I'm not sure how the article differs in that regard.


 * 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

The article is rated as a "Start Class" article. I think that it lays a good groundwork for the article, and leaves room for more information to be included. The article needs more reliable sourcing, and more about the biology, geology and historical uses of the lake. Maybe a higher class article could be used as an example going forward. I think the the article is somewhat developed. Some issues are addressed thoroughly, while others are either incompletely addressed, or not addressed at all.


 * 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?

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 Talk:Clear Lake (California)