User:Foxstronautilus/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Illegal mining

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article matters as it is important issue in the world of environmental policy. When looking at peer-reviewed journals about this topic, we can see that multiple countries across the globe face problems from illegal mining. This wikipedia article however does not mention many, and overall provides a small overview of the issue.

Evaluate the article
The leading part of the article seems to do a good job summarising the issue at hand and it is relevant to the topic. However it includes some information that are later not mentioned in the subsections of the article, even though it links to the journals and sources. The lead is not overly detailed, but it also lacks some information that connects the points together.

The content after the lead is relevant to the overall topic of the article and it connects to the lead as well. However it only touches on "Regional Issues" and does not mention any other aspects of the issue. Even in the regional issues, it seems to lack important parts and the sentences and transitions often fail to connect. Furthermore, there is very little about the actual policy's regarding the illegal mining activities, which should be a large part of the article. Some sections seem to be outdated as they link to outdated sources on relevant issues.

The tone and balance is neutral and does not favour any sides of the debate on the issues. I believe that there is no bias in the article. It also does not try to persuade the reader into any direction on the debate.

In terms of sources and references, the article lacks them in important parts. Many facts, especially in the "Sub-saharan Africa" subsection are missing the sources. Other sources, such as the ones in the subsection "India" have outdated sources on ongoing issues and need to be updated. However the 7 provided sources are thorough and peer-reviewed. I found multiple journals that could help the "Sub-saharan Africa" subsection and other peer-reviewed journals that touch on other countries currently not yet mentioned in the article. The links in the current article to other wikipedia articles and sources work properly.

The article is concise and very easy to read, however it misses important points about the issue and forgets to talk about the claims it made in the lead. The current sections and subsections however contain important information that should not be removed. I did not find any grammatical or writing errors.

There is only one image provided in the article at the leading part. That one is cited properly, however it does not capture the theme of the article. Thus further images are needed, especially in the later subsections.

Overall the article is in its rudimentary stages and it is mentioned in the talk pages. It requires more updating and peer reviews. It is in the interest of multiple wikiprojects and is rated start-class. It touches on multiple countries and it is unbiased. However it could be improved by including more sources and more subsections.