User:Jeartis17/sandbox

Article Evaluation:

At least one paragraph of notes have been added about the article’s content.

- In regards to the article's content, the article has great baseline information but does not delve too much into the specifics of the era. All information is relevant to the topic, however, in the second paragraph I was a little distracted by the reference to Dinitrogen and its impacts on the atmosphere. This distraction was spurred by the fact that throughout the beginning of the article the main point of discussion was regarding the age of the era and the mention of dinitrogen and the atmosphere felt abrupt and as if more background information needed to be presented before it was mentioned. No information is out of date. All scientific information is presented clearly and accurately without apparent bias. The article does link to multiple other Wikipedia articles for related topics. One thing that is missing that I feel could be added is why this topic is worth mentioning. The article states the what, when, and where but does not state the why and without the purpose apparent, it does create slight confusion on what is worth reading. Lastly, as for what could be improved, I think the information stated is quality and important to understanding the era but some of the information needs to be introduced and analyzed more clearly because without the introduction or analysis of certain information it makes the article feel a little choppy.

At least one sentence of notes have been added about the article’s tone.

- Through the word choice and the style of the writing of the article, the tone is scholarly and neutral. The tone utilizes many words that could be unknown to the general population so I do think this creates a tone that can be confusing to some as the word choice could be a little more welcoming to those with no knowledge of the topic. No claim is over or underrepresented and this could solely be due to the fact that the article mainly provided baseline information for what the Mesoarchean era was.

At least one sentence of notes have been added about the article’s sources.

- The article's sources are of great quality. Four sources are present and three of the four sources are either peer reviewed or from an academic journal while the fourth source was from a published scientific book. The sources are quality, formal, and academic. All links work and all facts are directly attributed to a source.

At least one sentence of notes have been added about the article’s talk page.

- There are 5 points published in the article's talk page by different users. Each opinion stated on the talk page has a title that outlines what the user wishes to do add to the article, along with information that is important to the article provision. The last conversation posted on the Talk Page was in June of 2020. The article is rated as Stub-Class. This article is a part of a WikiProject called WikiProject Geology.