User:Heathadr/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Water cycle

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

The water cycle is an essential part of understanding the movement of bioessential elements though the Earth system, as well as, weather and climate. I chose to look at the water cycle because of its close links to my area of interest, biogeochemical cycles. My initial impression is that the article covers a solid general background of the water cycle, however, it lacks depth.

Evaluate the article
(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.)

Content

The article has a substantial lead section that concisely defines and highlights significant concepts of the water cycle. However, in the following sections, there are areas in which content can be improved.

Heat transfer within the water cycle is an area of content that is underrepresented within the article. One of the only references to heat transfer is a sentence in the lead section stating, "heat exchanges influence climate." The water cycle is an essential part of the global climatic system, which should be emphasized in this article. Dedicating an entire section of the article to heat transfer within the water cycle and its impacts on global weather and climate would be reasonable.

The "physical processes" section lists definitions for "physical processes" within the water cycle. This section does not look necessary and feels disruptive to the flow of the article. A more robust "overall process" section with links to articles defining each physical process could address issues with the "physical processes" section. The "overall process" section could even be broken into subsections if building it out makes it into an overwhelming section of text.

The "historical interpretations" section at the end of the page provides helpful background on the development of human understanding of the water cycle. However, it would be beneficial to organize the subsections by date. Currently, there isn't a clear structure, and organizing this section by date would show the progression of historical water cycle theories.

Tone

           The tone throughout the article remains neutral and unbiased. There aren't heavily biased or fringe viewpoints expressed, and the article does not attempt to persuade the reader of a particular point of view.

Evaluating Sources

The current citations for the article are not sufficient. There is only one citation in the lead section and the "Overall process" section. The reference is a reputable source; however, pulling all information in these sections from one source weakens the information presented. These two sections are central to the article, so citations must be added here. Citations would add strength to verify information with additional sources and provide reliable secondary sources of information.

The article presents information released in 2021 from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which provides recent insights on the topic. IPCC information strengthens the article's "Changes caused by humans" section by presenting reputable research from a diverse group of scientists.

Talking Page

Currently, this article is rated C-Class level-4 vital article in Science Physics. Wikipedia has listed this article as high-importance, asking editors to contribute. The article is within the WikiProject groups: Ecology, Physics, Water, Geology, Soil, Limnology and Oceanography, Weather/General, Environment, and Climate Change. Other Wikipedia editors agree that the article requires restructuring and some rearranging. Most recently, there was a suggestion to rework the "physical processes" section since it is a list of links and definitions. As I mentioned above, I agree that the "physical processes" section needs restructuring.