User:Enina24/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1
https://www.jstor.org/stable/635501?casa_token=bz0XOtoYnJ0AAAAA%3A2m5T3XWUFGIYq_Fdk1wn2-GfzXZu4oE7wDaJw932lV6w0cl5Qo-pOhQQ7THpokda_hPWYRUhXscVTg1UG5JqUz6OReeokDlhkL2fA_lfFNBGHaxixafQ&seq=6
 * Article title
 * Environmental Movement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Environmental_movement)
 * Article Evaluation
 * The article’s lead section does describe clearly about the environmental movement. It describes the major sections well and concise. The content is up-to-date saying “in 2022, Global Witness reported that, in the preceding decade, more than 1,700 land and environmental defenders were killed, about one every two days. Brazil, Colombia, Philippines, and Mexico were the deadliest countries”. I would say the content could be more about on the environmental issues like saying how is the environment in China and Asia. I would say this article is not neutral, I say it’s trying to persuade the reader to save the environment and explain how it’s being affected. Not all facts are backed up with a reliable source of information. Some paragraphs have one source, even though the paragraph is long you would think it would have more sources to support it. Some sources are functioning, and others haven’t been up to date for a while, like reference #41 “Latin America’s Environmental Movement Seen as Well-Meaning but Inadequate” and #19 “An Act to incorporate and confer powers upon the National Trust for Places of Historic interest or Natural Beauty”. There are many random websites, better sources like https://www.state.gov/stockholm50  could work well. The organization of the article is well organized with an introduction, history section, and environmental issues in other countries. The article includes many images that are captioned well. In the talk page the article is c-rated and on WikiProjects. Also, there are conversations about neutrality of criticism and deep green environmentalism. Overall, the article is good and could be improved by adding more information to the country sections.
 * Sources
 * http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/10080/1/61.pdf.pdf#page=617
 * The article’s lead section does describe clearly about the environmental movement. It describes the major sections well and concise. The content is up-to-date saying “in 2022, Global Witness reported that, in the preceding decade, more than 1,700 land and environmental defenders were killed, about one every two days. Brazil, Colombia, Philippines, and Mexico were the deadliest countries”. I would say the content could be more about on the environmental issues like saying how is the environment in China and Asia. I would say this article is not neutral, I say it’s trying to persuade the reader to save the environment and explain how it’s being affected. Not all facts are backed up with a reliable source of information. Some paragraphs have one source, even though the paragraph is long you would think it would have more sources to support it. Some sources are functioning, and others haven’t been up to date for a while, like reference #41 “Latin America’s Environmental Movement Seen as Well-Meaning but Inadequate” and #19 “An Act to incorporate and confer powers upon the National Trust for Places of Historic interest or Natural Beauty”. There are many random websites, better sources like https://www.state.gov/stockholm50  could work well. The organization of the article is well organized with an introduction, history section, and environmental issues in other countries. The article includes many images that are captioned well. In the talk page the article is c-rated and on WikiProjects. Also, there are conversations about neutrality of criticism and deep green environmentalism. Overall, the article is good and could be improved by adding more information to the country sections.
 * Sources
 * http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/10080/1/61.pdf.pdf#page=617
 * http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/10080/1/61.pdf.pdf#page=617

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Animal Rebellion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Rebellion )
 * Article Evaluation
 * The lead introduction does clearly describe the article’s topic and is concise. Also, includes brief descriptions of the article’s major sections. The content is relevant to the topic and is up to date to the year of 2022, talking about events and protest. I think this article is missing content like the history and overview of the animal rebellion. I feel like the article is not neutral it appears heavily biased and persuades the reader to favor one position which is the protestors side like having more a plant-base food system. I feel like to include more neutrality adding more opinions about people who disagree with the protesters would be nice. Some of the sources are backed up by reliable secondary sources like News BBC. But most articles are not current, and they haven’t been updated for a couple years like “Animal Rebellion activists to blockade UK's biggest meat market” source. Other sources are not reliable sources like the Yahoo! source. Some better sources could be news articles and interview articles. All the links in the article are working. The article is organized clearly by the introduction and then it describes each year of events starting with 2019 – 2022. The images are clear and well-captioned. The images are laid out one side, but one could be put on the other side. The animal rebellion is rated c-class and parts of many Wiki projects like animal rights. Overall, the article is good it has images and content. The article could include more images and more sections about the history. I think the article is underdeveloped and could use more sources.
 * Sources
 * The lead introduction does clearly describe the article’s topic and is concise. Also, includes brief descriptions of the article’s major sections. The content is relevant to the topic and is up to date to the year of 2022, talking about events and protest. I think this article is missing content like the history and overview of the animal rebellion. I feel like the article is not neutral it appears heavily biased and persuades the reader to favor one position which is the protestors side like having more a plant-base food system. I feel like to include more neutrality adding more opinions about people who disagree with the protesters would be nice. Some of the sources are backed up by reliable secondary sources like News BBC. But most articles are not current, and they haven’t been updated for a couple years like “Animal Rebellion activists to blockade UK's biggest meat market” source. Other sources are not reliable sources like the Yahoo! source. Some better sources could be news articles and interview articles. All the links in the article are working. The article is organized clearly by the introduction and then it describes each year of events starting with 2019 – 2022. The images are clear and well-captioned. The images are laid out one side, but one could be put on the other side. The animal rebellion is rated c-class and parts of many Wiki projects like animal rights. Overall, the article is good it has images and content. The article could include more images and more sections about the history. I think the article is underdeveloped and could use more sources.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2723215111?parentSessionId=HK5rg%2F0ReRIYKnWLaymrSg5kQ0%2Fh1159BraLWimtNAc%3D&pq-origsite=primo&accountid=10896 

 https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.fitchburgstate.idm.oclc.org/pmc/articles/PMC4641496/ 

Option 3
https://www.proquest.com/docview/199490151?parentSessionId=nJVVuKZaXlmq5BBeb4F%2BwmHOHn6FHpIi3Ntpd4JDedk%3D&pq-origsite=primo&accountid=10896
 * Article title
 * Dark-sky movement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark-sky_movement )
 * Article Evaluation
 * The articles lead introduction is clear and has a brief description of the article’s major sections. I do think the article is overly detailed, some parts could be in a separate section like a overview. The content in the article is relevant to the topic. But the content doesn’t seem up-to-date to the current year. Also, it does seem to miss content there definitely could be more content that could be added like more about the organizations associated with the movement. The article doesn’t seem neutral it attempts to persuade the reader in favor of one position which is more reducing light pollution. Some sources of the article are reliable because they are peer-reviewed by professional authors. There are other sources that are not updated like #11. Also, some links don’t function like #6 and #13. Some better sources can replace random sites like peer-reviewed articles. The organization is clear and easy to read from the introduction section to the organization section. The article only includes one image with a caption which is nicely placed next to the section it belongs to. More images could be added to understand the topic well. On the talk page conversations talk about whether the title should be the dark-sky movement and Los Angeles Observatory. The article is Start-Class rated and is in the WikiProjects Astronomy. Overall, the article is good. It is organized well with couple of good sources. I think it could improve on images and more sections about the organizations. The article is undeveloped so far.
 * Sources
 * https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A19849646/AONE?u=mlin_c_fitchcol&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=9b843e4c
 * The articles lead introduction is clear and has a brief description of the article’s major sections. I do think the article is overly detailed, some parts could be in a separate section like a overview. The content in the article is relevant to the topic. But the content doesn’t seem up-to-date to the current year. Also, it does seem to miss content there definitely could be more content that could be added like more about the organizations associated with the movement. The article doesn’t seem neutral it attempts to persuade the reader in favor of one position which is more reducing light pollution. Some sources of the article are reliable because they are peer-reviewed by professional authors. There are other sources that are not updated like #11. Also, some links don’t function like #6 and #13. Some better sources can replace random sites like peer-reviewed articles. The organization is clear and easy to read from the introduction section to the organization section. The article only includes one image with a caption which is nicely placed next to the section it belongs to. More images could be added to understand the topic well. On the talk page conversations talk about whether the title should be the dark-sky movement and Los Angeles Observatory. The article is Start-Class rated and is in the WikiProjects Astronomy. Overall, the article is good. It is organized well with couple of good sources. I think it could improve on images and more sections about the organizations. The article is undeveloped so far.
 * Sources
 * https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A19849646/AONE?u=mlin_c_fitchcol&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=9b843e4c
 * Sources
 * https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A19849646/AONE?u=mlin_c_fitchcol&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=9b843e4c
 * https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A19849646/AONE?u=mlin_c_fitchcol&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=9b843e4c

Option 4
https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.fitchburgstate.idm.oclc.org/32286697/
 * Article title
 * Anti-fracking movement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fracking_movement )
 * Article Evaluation
 * The lead introduction clearly describes the article’s topic and the major sections. Also, its concise not overly detailed. The article’s content is relevant to the topic. But the content is not up to date to current years. Some content is missing like the history and other sections describing other places connection with this movement. It doesn’t seem like the article is neutral, it attempts to persuade the reader to end fracking. Using other opinions about fracking may make the argument stronger. Some of the sources seem reliable like #1, but other articles haven’t been updated for a couple years. Better sources like scholarly articles can replace random website articles. All the links function in the references. The organization is clear and easy to read specifically with the information the article currently has. The article doesn’t contain images. The article is rated start-class and is part of WikiProjects like environment. Overall, the article is standard. The strengths are it has a good introduction and organization. The article needs to improve by adding more images relating to the movement and more sources as well. The article is underdeveloped.
 * Sources
 * https://www.proquest.com/docview/2126731820?parentSessionId=ewBOdEepjfiqFeTnO%2BSWO2Rmp3wWquU%2FpO%2Bn%2B%2BHWRXI%3D&pq-origsite=primo&accountid=10896
 * The lead introduction clearly describes the article’s topic and the major sections. Also, its concise not overly detailed. The article’s content is relevant to the topic. But the content is not up to date to current years. Some content is missing like the history and other sections describing other places connection with this movement. It doesn’t seem like the article is neutral, it attempts to persuade the reader to end fracking. Using other opinions about fracking may make the argument stronger. Some of the sources seem reliable like #1, but other articles haven’t been updated for a couple years. Better sources like scholarly articles can replace random website articles. All the links function in the references. The organization is clear and easy to read specifically with the information the article currently has. The article doesn’t contain images. The article is rated start-class and is part of WikiProjects like environment. Overall, the article is standard. The strengths are it has a good introduction and organization. The article needs to improve by adding more images relating to the movement and more sources as well. The article is underdeveloped.
 * Sources
 * https://www.proquest.com/docview/2126731820?parentSessionId=ewBOdEepjfiqFeTnO%2BSWO2Rmp3wWquU%2FpO%2Bn%2B%2BHWRXI%3D&pq-origsite=primo&accountid=10896
 * https://www.proquest.com/docview/2126731820?parentSessionId=ewBOdEepjfiqFeTnO%2BSWO2Rmp3wWquU%2FpO%2Bn%2B%2BHWRXI%3D&pq-origsite=primo&accountid=10896

Option 5
https://web-s-ebscohost-com.fitchburgstate.idm.oclc.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=dfc722b7-e37f-47c2-b468-82a0abc6b852%40redis
 * Article title
 * Red Power movement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Power_movement )
 * Article Evaluation
 * The articles lead introduction does clearly describe the article’s topic and the major sections. I would say that is overly detailed for an introduction. The content is relevant to the topic but it doesn’t seem up to date to current years. Some content does seem missing for some of the main organizations like “National Indian Youth Council”. The article doesn’t seem neutral it persuades the reader to understand the Native Americans. For sources the article does have a good amount of reliable to support facts. But some articles are not up to date. Also, some links don’t work. Better sources like scholar sources and primary sources may be better for this article.  The organization is concise and clear to read. The images the article has are visually appealing with good captions. On the talk page it is rated start-class and is on WikiProjects Indigenous peoples of North America. There are conversations on the talk page about peer view. Overall, the status is good. The strengths are it is clear and organized. It can be improved on including more images that relate to more sections that relate to the movement. It is well-developed so far.
 * Sources
 * https://go-gale-com.fitchburgstate.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&hitCount=1&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA693017839&docType=Book+review&sort=RELEVANCE&contentSegment=ZONE-MOD1&prodId=AONE&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA693017839&searchId=R1&userGroupName=mlin_c_fitchcol&inPS=truez
 * The articles lead introduction does clearly describe the article’s topic and the major sections. I would say that is overly detailed for an introduction. The content is relevant to the topic but it doesn’t seem up to date to current years. Some content does seem missing for some of the main organizations like “National Indian Youth Council”. The article doesn’t seem neutral it persuades the reader to understand the Native Americans. For sources the article does have a good amount of reliable to support facts. But some articles are not up to date. Also, some links don’t work. Better sources like scholar sources and primary sources may be better for this article.  The organization is concise and clear to read. The images the article has are visually appealing with good captions. On the talk page it is rated start-class and is on WikiProjects Indigenous peoples of North America. There are conversations on the talk page about peer view. Overall, the status is good. The strengths are it is clear and organized. It can be improved on including more images that relate to more sections that relate to the movement. It is well-developed so far.
 * Sources
 * https://go-gale-com.fitchburgstate.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&hitCount=1&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA693017839&docType=Book+review&sort=RELEVANCE&contentSegment=ZONE-MOD1&prodId=AONE&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA693017839&searchId=R1&userGroupName=mlin_c_fitchcol&inPS=truez
 * https://go-gale-com.fitchburgstate.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&hitCount=1&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA693017839&docType=Book+review&sort=RELEVANCE&contentSegment=ZONE-MOD1&prodId=AONE&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA693017839&searchId=R1&userGroupName=mlin_c_fitchcol&inPS=truez
 * https://go-gale-com.fitchburgstate.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&hitCount=1&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA693017839&docType=Book+review&sort=RELEVANCE&contentSegment=ZONE-MOD1&prodId=AONE&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CA693017839&searchId=R1&userGroupName=mlin_c_fitchcol&inPS=truez