User:Graysongoms/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Petroleum exploration in the Arctic

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I believe it is important to look at the different ways in which we harvest oil/natural gas before choosing to be pro oil or anti oil. This article matters because it demonstrates my point of oil being costly, hard to manage (oil rigs exploding, pipelines bursting, etc), and has harsh consequences on those who are exposed to its chemical makeup.

Evaluate the article
The leading sentence of the article perfectly captures its contents and makes remarks towards why arctic petroleum exploration became more and more prominent. The content is up to date as of 2016 but could use expanding on in the environmental concerns section. The content is spot on to what the article is trying to convey but could use some updating if there has been any more cases of arctic petroleum exploration. The article is fairly neutral in that it highlights the environmental concerns as well as the benefits of how much oil is in the arctic which could be used for good. There are a few other articles not on wikipedia related to this topic but most are focused on a singular entity rather than petroleum arctic exploration as a whole. The article is broken down into main sections to highlight all the article has on petroleum arctic exploration. It includes which countries have contributed the most to this exploration, the environmental concerns of mining in the arctic, and an overview of the progress made in the arctic area. I think there could be some more specific images on the article rather than a general one (which shows the basins located globally around the arctic). I think by adding some more specific images of crews mining it would give a better illustration of what exactly goes on when mining for oil in the arctic. The article is apart of several wikiprojects and as for back room chatter, there is not much going on other than the addition of sources and minor content tweaks. For how short the article is, I am impressed with how much information the article does hold given its length. I think the article could be improved with some addition in content such as images, expansion on certain topics, and any new information in this field that has come to late since the article's publishing date. (Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)