User:Jbkel/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

 * Name of article: Natural resource (Natural resource)
 * I chose this article because it is interesting to me and it pertains both to the subject of the course and with my field of study (environmental science).

Lead evaluation
The article begins with an okay introductory sentence that gives a definition of what a natural resource is and gives example of natural resources. The introduction cites dictionaries which are considered as secondary sources, which Wikipedia prefers. At first I was not sure if these dictionaries were trustworthy sources as I did not recognize them but one of them is powered by oxford. The lead covers most topics that follow in a brief description except it does not talk about the protection and the management of natural resources. The lead does not include anything that does not appear in the article. This article is concise and well written but could use better sources and maybe a bit more information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The content of this article contains relevant information to the topic, it goes over the different types of natural resources, the ways they are extracted, the depletion of resources, protection of resources and management. The content of this article seems up to date and doesn't seem to be missing any major areas within this topic. The content is up to date.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
This article is neutral in the way it is written. There are no claims that seem heavily biased, however it does state that natural resources are finite and need to be conserved. I don't consider this biased as it the general consensus in the science community. The article does not try and persuade the reader in any particular way.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Most of the facts in the article are backed with citations to mostly secondary sources, some primary sources and a few tertiary sources. In the lead and the classification of types of resources there is some information that may need citing. The sources seem to be thorough and related to the topic but could use some more primary literature in my opinion. Many of the sources are current and are from the past ten years but it also has some dated ones that go as far back as the 80's. Even though these sources are so old they may still be credible. All of the sources l checked worked, except for one, and seemed credible. The only link that did not work was [18], which linked to a 404 error.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
This article is concise and clear and generally easy to read. The article did not have any grammatical errors that I found. For the most part the article is organized well except for under the caption "Classification" could be organized a little better, maybe by splitting it into subheadings.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
The article uses appropriate images that enhance the readers understanding of the topic.The images are all well captioned and adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. They are laid out along the sides of the text in a visually appealing way and do not take away from the reading experience.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page of this article was not very busy and I only saw two posts, one by a bot saying there are dead links, and one by an editor who fixed a dead link. This article is part of many wiki projects such as environment and geology. This topic is directly related to the class topic and there are some things that were discussed in class like mining.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
This article is evaluated as a C class. This article is written well and is easy to follow for the most part. It uses pictures well and does a good general overview of the topic. This article can be improved by getting more sources and possibly newer sources. The article could use a bit of reorganizing to make some parts flow better. Overall I wold consider this article in between okay and well developed.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: