User:Hlucham/sandbox

 Article Evaluation:  Global Change - Global change

'''Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?'''

After reading this article I do believe everything is pertinent to the topic. It was laid out in a convenient order; the causes, the evidence, how it relates to society, and how we are to manage this change.

In each section, it does mention what each sub-heading indicates but I found late in each section to go off a bit on a tangent. For example in the Causes sub-heading, the first two paragraphs were pertinent, but then the last paragraph seemed to talk more about the implications or consequences of global change, rather than the causes. Overall, I found it to be very informative.

'''Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?'''

For the most part, the citations seem to be post-2010. That is more relevant and accurate as a source when compared to citing an article from the 1950's-1980's (which you still see a lot). The only pertinent issue that needs to be added is the lack of citations. Throughout the page, it was evident that citations were needed for a lot of various points of information.

What else could be improved?

Overall, I found the article to be highly informative. One thing I always to find impactful is a implications section. This is where information can be added to illustrate the change that can happen (hypothetically) in various circumstances. Illustrating the extremes or highlighting the change the earth can experience will help the reader think about the future, and not just global change in the past or present.

 Article Selection 

Fog bow

This is a relatively short page on Wikipedia, but I think it stands to see some improvement. It isn't a phenomena that requires much detail, but the article only states what I find to be the bare essentials. Adding content such as the science behind how its created, where this phenomena typically occurs, the frequency of this event, etc. would be beneficial in creating a much more in-depth page on this topic. There is only one citation on this page related to the content, so I think adding more information will help to create a more comprehensive report.

Particulate pollution

One thing that stood out for the Wikipedia page was the lack of information on atmospheric particulate matter. It wasn't too in-depth in its descriptions on the 3 types of particulate pollution in the three different spheres. For a more detailed page, I believe adding more information would be pertinent. Adding the source of said particulates and their impacts would be a huge start in creating a more detailed entry.

Chubasco

In this Wikipedia page, I found that this needed the most improvement. It is a unique phenomena, one of which I have never heard of. It is this page where I will choose to edit an article. I do not know how much information is out there on this topic, but credible sources need to be added. Things that I feel would add to this topic would be talking about the phenomena itself. Talking about the science behind the formation of this storm will help to create a more clear picture on what this is, and how it is created. Secondly, talking about the repercussions on this phenomena is extremely important to illustrating a clear picture for the reader. Lastly, including visuals will supplement the text greatly.