User:Izzy207/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Earth Overshoot Day

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it interested me. I have never heard of Earth Overshoot Day (EOD) but it makes sense. The earth provides us with so many resources. Yet, there is a point where we will deplete these resources, ie use more than it is able to recover. This idea is extremely important because it plays a big role in climate change. If we take too much from the Earth now, then we won't have anything to use in the future.

Preliminarily, my impression was that more people should know about this. It is a concept that is pretty straight forward, a calculated date when we have taken all the resources that the Earth can provide us, yet many haven't heard of it before.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is pretty concise. It contains a nice introduction that explains what the article will be about and provides introductory definitions and detail. It does not really discuss the sections that will be further explained later in the article. Additionally, it mentions COVID-19 and vaguely describes its effect on EOD, however there is no further explanation or mention of that later in the article leaving the reader quite lost.

The content included in this article is relevant and recent. There is no content that does not belong, however there are some gaps. I think the article could benefit from some more historical references or timeline so that the reader can have a good perspective. The article does present critics which provide the reader the other side of the arguments.

For the most part the article has a neutral tone. If anything it supports EOD, however it does provide some opposing arguments.

All of the articles claims are backed-up by multiple sources. The sources are different types of sources, websites, articles, peer-reviewed journals, etc. All of the sources are current. There are definitely more sources that could be included here however the ones that are present are not bad. Not many of the sources come from marginalized groups. The links do work.

The article is well written. There are no grammatical or spelling errors. It flows nicely and is arranged in an organized fashion.

There is one image in the article. While it is informative, it would be better if it were larger in size so that readers can examine it better. This image is a graph, so while it's title is descriptive, it's only a basic description. More information on the trend line could be added.

The talk page really criticizes this article. Many ask for more sources to be provided, some with less political background. Additionally, some people found parts of the article a bit repetitive which in hindsight I would agree with. The repetitiveness comes from the author trying to explain studies without plagiarizing them however.

After reading this article myself, and the talk page I would say this article could be approved. They could provide more scientific resources that present arguments to both sides. Also include more historical background, that considers the events happening at different time periods and how those would effect EOD. Additionally, elaborate more on the pandemics effect. That is very relevant so more elaboration there is warranted.