User:Ild8/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Rewilding (conservation biology)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I found this as a result of exploring the "Extinction" category because extinction is a subject I have been interested in a lot lately, especially in the context of climate change and biodiversity. I would love to learn more about manipulative experiments and interventions to try to mitigate the effects of climate change on biodiversity globally, and I think this article could give me a broad overview of the subject!

Evaluate the article

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * There wasn't anything that distracted me! Everything seems relevant and the flow of the article made a lot of sense.  One thing that I noticed is that in the section on Ecosystem engineers, there is extensive information on beavers and their diets and habitats (it mentions specific species of trees), which seems unnecessary but not out of place.
 * It seems a bit weird to have a single section for every other country while there are two sections for England ("England" and "Reforestation in England"). Overkill, no?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * It all seems up-to-date! I think that a few of the specific counties' sections seem really sparse, so it could be nice to have more information on the data collected from those sites and the effects of the rewilding programs on the local environment, if that research/data exists.
 * It could also be more informative if it had more examples of rewilding programs in different countries/regions.
 * Can you identify any notable equity gaps? Does the article underrepresent or misrepresent historically marginalized populations?
 * Not really, but a lot of the information on rewilding programs in specific countries seem to focus on western countries and/or westerner-led research projects. It would be more well-rounded if it explored other rewilding projects in other parts of the world as well.
 * What else could be improved?
 * Hmmmm, the history section only discusses recent history, but I think it would be more informative if it explored (briefly) older "rewilding" movements that had the same goals and methods but maybe not the same name.


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article seems neutral from my point of view. It has a lengthy "criticism" section which balances out the section that gives an overview of rewilding programs and their impact.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Nope!
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Yes! The citations that I checked out all worked and supported the claims of the article, and they all stated the claims (not just gave the data from which the claims could be drawn).
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * I honestly didn't check every single reference, but I checked a handful and they all came from reliable sources that had no obvious bias or stake.
 * Do the sources come from a diverse array of authors and publications?
 * Yes! They are mostly academic papers, so they aren't super diverse in that regard, but they have authors from all over the world and from a lot of different research areas!
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There aren't really any interesting conversations, just people talking about renaming sections and stuff. Not a lot of explanation or anything.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It's part of the ecology wikiproject and it doesn't seem too popular (just 111 page views per day).
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't really talked about this topic in class much so I can't really say, but it does give a lot more history and specific examples than we would probably explore in class if we talked about it more.