User:Emmamlewis/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Alberta Parks

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article as it was similar to what we discuss in class. It is about the Alberta Parks which is an agency that manages Alberta`s parks and protected areas.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this article was short, but directly explained what the article was about and what the Alberta Parks did. The lead did not, however, include a brief description of the articles major sections. it was very concise and did not include any information that did not belong. The content of the article was relevant to the topic and was up to date. It seems all content was included, but the article did not deal with one of Wikipedia`s equity gaps. The article was neutral, and did a good job explaining the history without heavily favoring one side. There was also no persuasion present. The sources in this article were thorough and current, with the last update being made in 2021. The links in the article work, and are trusted sites, but I believe more sources and information could be included. The article is well written and no grammatical errors were spotted, but I think the information could have been presented better. It was all somewhat thrown in at once and does not allow the reader to breath. There is only one section in this article and it is the history. There are no images included, but there is a table of statistics of the park systems. This image is from 2014 though, so it could be updated to a closer year. There are no conversations that have happened on the talk page, but the article is a part of WikiProject Canada in an attempt to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. The article is rated Start-Class on the project`s quality scale and has been rated low-importance. Overall, the article was very informational and gave a great background of the topic. I think some information and dialogue could be included to break up all of the facts and make it easier to read. I would say overall, the article is slightly underdeveloped. While it includes fantastic history, some newer information could be beneficial.