User:Eternalsunshineofthespotlesspotato/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: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The lead is concise and describes and defines the articles topic, giving background context to the history of dead zones and the increase of them due to human actions. However, the lead gives information on a UN program and published book from the early 2000s but doesn't give any reference to that book within the article nor is it updated to a more recent book, if it exists.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The article's content is relevant to the topic, however it is not as up-to-date as it could be. Especially under the Gulf of Mexico "location" tab, more recent studies should be available to update the size and impact of the dead zone. There could be more policies and standards referenced besides the Energy and Independence Security Act of 2007, and there could possibly be an entire section on policies that relate to dead zones in different areas. There are many "citation needed" attachments and most of the references could be expanded upon or updated.

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?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral, and there doesn't seem to be any competing perspective on dead zones because they are largely recognized and accepted as a negative consequence to climate change and other factors.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The sources are not all current, nor is everything cited. Some of the links under references are to outdated pages that no longer exist, and multiple lead to official government or organization websites that no longer carry the pages or articles referenced.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
The article could be organized better by adding categories underneath the "Effects" section and by creating a "Policy" section. There are a few capitalization errors and some formatting errors.

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?

Images and media evaluation
There could be more media underneath the "Location" sections and definitely within the "Effects" section. Most of the images are small and some are repetitive, showing world map with the dead zones highlighted.

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?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is a bit confusing to me, it is rated as a C-class article, with high importance in some areas and sparse talk content.

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: