User:Heeyeons/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Freshwater environmental quality parameters

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.)

I chose this article because the topic of the article, freshwater environmental quality parameters, is closely related to the course I am taking. As various kinds of environmental factors influence water's chemical composition, to assess the water's environmental quality, we need to regulate essential parameters to better understand the water chemistry and give an information to decision makers.

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.)

The lead section includes a good introduction and mentions the topic clearly, summarizing the article's topic. The article has general information for content, and the content is relevant to the topic. I also think the article's overall tone is neutral, but in the sampling part, it would be better if there was additional information about the reason for the difficulty of freshwater sampling with the citation from reliable sources.

The article has several references to support it, but I believe that the number of the sources is small and needs additional sources to support it. Nevertheless, most current sources are peer-reviewed publications, and just more reliable sources are needed to have strong support. Furthermore, the organization and writing quality are delicate and easy to read.

On the other hand, as the article does not have images to understand the water quality parameters better, I think it is necessary to input some images for laypeople who are not academics.

The article is a part of WikiProject Environment and rated as start-class on the project's quality scale. However, there is just a few discussion on the Talk page, which allows it to add more discussion to increase the strength of the article.

Last, as an overall impression of this article, I think the article is fine, it has general information, but some parts, such as references, images, and discussion, need to be edited with additional information for more support.