User:Hjnelson02/Evaluate an Article

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

Ammonia pollution

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 I am looking to edit this page for a class project. My first impression is that the article seems a little short for all the problems that the pollution causes and that some more information can be added to those sections and specifically how it decreases biodiversity.

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 was pretty good though it lacked some information about how it effects ecosystems which is present later in the article but was otherwise concise. The content of the article was also good and none of the sections provided too much detail or stuff that should be put on a new page. It does not address historically underrepresented people but I'm not sure how this topic would relate anyway. I think that more content can be added to aquatic effects considering that most of the ammonia enters lakes and rivers and eventually the oceans and the section was also a little confusing. They also only mention the impacts of aerosols in regards to human health and not how it effects other animals.

The tone is neutral throughout the article and there are no biased claims. The viewpoints are equal and the sections have similar amounts of information. There are only 2 citations in the aquatic effects section though the entire article in general is lacking in citations and some statements like saying ammonia decreases biodiversity don't have citations. The citations that are present are thorough and current and the links work. Most sources are peer reviewed literature. The article is pretty easy to read though it may delve into a little bit too much detail and a couple of the sections are more confusing but is overall good. The spelling and grammar is good along with the fact that it is broken down into appropriate sections. The images are relevant and how ammonia pollution along with a species that it impacts and they have nice captions.

There is nothing going on in the talk page of the article. It is rated C-class and is related the the environment and occupational safety and health wikiprojects. We focused a lot more on ammonia in the water and there isn't a ton about that in the article and it focuses a lot on human health along with monitoring techniques.

I think that the article is in good shape but could use some cleanup in all the sections and potentially some additional topics showing the importance of regulating ammonia pollution. The article does a good job at explaining the sources of the pollution and what causes them. I think it is slightly underdeveloped and just needs some more research along with additional citations.