User:HaskelleTW/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The Geology of Venus.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
My research studies Venus' evolution and geology, and I wanted to see the state of it's article. Studying Venus is important for understanding terrestrial planet evolution. As we prepare for three upcoming missions at the end of this decade, this research will become more relevant to the general public, so it's important to provide accurate information about why we care about this planet.

I was surprised to see the call for more citations and further verification. It's a C-class article as well, so I think it needs some more content.

Evaluate the article
Everything in the article is relevant to the topic, but some sections need more content (i.e. Global Resurfacing Event).

Some information is out-of-date. For example, the article says that active volcanism is "plausible," but recent work from Herrick et al. (2023) demonstrate active volcanism from Magellan data.

Very few sources are written by authors from historically marginalized populations, and this reflects systemic issues in the field of Planetary Sciences.

The very first sentence shows some personal opinion, but the article's tone is overall neutral with no bias towards particular claims. However, some view points are overrepresented. For example "Ancient Liquid Water" they say that liquid water could have persisted until 715 Ma. This is one model estimate, and there is a broad range of possibilities for water and habitability. This section is also very short for a topic with a lot of nuance and debate.

Links to sources work, and sources do support the claims in the article. All sources appear to be unbiased and reliable, but they could be a little more diverse. Many sources come from JGR, Icarus, or Progress in Physical Geography.

The Talk page rates this as "C-class." It is "high-importance" to the Geology WikiProject, and "mid-importance" to the Astronomy WikiProject. Most of the Talk page is fact-checking as well as assessing the credibility of sources.