User:Glash005/sandbox

Notes on the climate change article: This article is really well done. Each fact includes a citation and the majority of the citations are from peer-reviewed academic journals.

It is based on entirely on facts, and it has taken a neutral position. I don't see any biased positions or attempts to persuade the reader.

The majority of the sources are peer reviewed academic journals such as Nature, Journal of Climate, and Science. These are all unbiased journals that only publish articles based on facts and research.

It is interesting that there is no section or information about climate change denial and the partisanship of climate change in the U.S., but it may be that it only seems interesting that this excluded because I have the viewpoint of a U.S. citizen, and this article represents a global issue.

I checked several of the links for citations and they do work and send you to the articles in question. Links to other pages on Wikipedia work as well. I did notice one instance of close paraphrasing/plagiarism, the sentence "Glaciers are among the most sensitive indicators of climate change is a close paraphrase of the source "As well as being among the most sensitive climate indicators,...".

I think it is good that climate change is a semi-protected article on Wikipedia, because it is an issue that should not be divisive due to its basis in scientific fact, but there is still a vocal portion of the population, in the U.S. at least, that believes climate change is a hoax. People with these beliefs may be tempted to change the article to misrepresent information on climate change, and it being semi-protected helps to prevent this.

On the talk page people are discussing how two links on very similar topics redirect to two different pages, and how that should be changed so they both redirect to the same page. Climate change has been rated as a B-class article Glash005 (talk) 21:22, 5 May 2017 (UTC)