User:Jazz.chang/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Kauaʻi ʻōʻō)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(I have chosen to evaluate this article because it sparked my interest. I was planning on my writing my own article on a environmentally based issue, so this was perfect for me. This particular bird is also very special to me, it is one of the foundations of the hula halau I dance in and I was very eager to learn more.)

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 of the article was well written. It was clear and concise about the topic and gave a brief overview of the article without sharing information that wouldn't be included in the body. However, the first sentence was confusing, I understood it because I know of this topic already, but other readers would be confused due to the fact that the sentence doesn't even mention "bird" in it, only the scientific and Hawaiian name. The content was very on topic and up to date. There were a few missing parts that I was curious about, the introduction shared a multitude of possibilities for the cause of extinction while the context really only focused on a couple outcomes. This content definitely addresses a topic related to historically unrepresented populations and topics, that is Hawaiian people. However, the article stayed strictly on topic with the scientific view of the extinction of the bird. There was a very neutral perspective throughout the entire article. There wasn't very much persuasion within the writing, however, the author did give multiple hints at the end suggesting that there is a way these birds still survive undetected. When closing the article they said "believed to be extinct" and followed up with the fact that these birds had actually been declared extinct twice, once in 1940 and then again in the 1950's. This does cause the reader to sway more towards the idea that these birds could still be alive. The sources and references on this article are not the best. Barely any of the facts stated are backed up with a source whatsoever. Things like the date of extinction and the cause are left with no reference. The information that is available are sources on the Hawaiian name and history of the bird itself and lead to well written reliable articles. Because this article is so short it is well organized and easy to understand. The images used in the article are all arranged correctly and relate to the topic. They are properly captioned and cited and follow all regulations. Overall this was an informative article on a topic that simply doesn't have a lot of information around it already. It is nice to know that someone is writing about this bird at all, and you can tell the author put in efforts to provide reliable information. You can tell they are hopeful for the survival of this species and write about it with a soft spot.