User:Howardhailey/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Global Climate Action Summit.)

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 choose this article because I am interested in the Global Climate. I had not read this work about the Summit. The Global Climate Action Summit matters because it was state officials and influential people at the state level coming together to speak of Climate change and ways to work on climate change. )

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 article of the Global Climate Action Summit talks how the Global Climate Action that occurred in California in 2018. The lead explains the summit is a concise way and explains the topic. The lead does include a brief description and does not give information that isn't in the article further. The lead is concise and not overly detailed.

Moving on to the content of this article. The article is relevant to the topic of the summit. The content is not up to date and says that it needed to be updated. The article needs more citations for verification. This article did not deal with a equity gap or a topic that related to a underrepresented populations or topics.

The tone and balance of the article shows a neutrals article. There were not biased remarks. The article did not share any viewpoints of author but spoke on what happened at the Summit. The author doesn't seem to persuade readers.

The sources and references of the articles need to be updated for this article. The ones that are present do see to be used to give the information of the article. There citations all come from sources.

The articles organization and writing quality does show a concise factual article. I think there could be more detail given in the article. I do not see and grammatical errors. The article is organized well as it breaks to a new paragraph when its speaks of a different part of the summit.

The articles images and media do enhance the understanding minimully. There is only 1 picture but considering the article is five paragraphs this seems fair. The image does say who is in the picture and where but not what the person is doing. I think the image could have more details. The image was placed in a visual appealing way.

Talk page only shows that the article was marked as low importance related to the topic.

Overall, the article does give a brief discussion of the article but if you wanted details and further information this isn't the article for you. The articles strengths are giving a concise overview of the topic. The article could be improved by providing details on what was said at the summit, the event that occured after, and overall more details. I think the article is underdeveloped.