User:Jmjohnson43/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Energy Policy and Conservation Act

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I had not heard of the Energy Policy Conservation Act before and it seemed interesting to read about. Upon first read, the article seems to provide a broad overview of the law but does not offer many specifics on the policies within the law. The article also does not include much detail on the law's legislative history.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

The lead section is strong and concise, and offers a brief overview of what will be discussed in the article. One area of possible improvement for the lead would be to include some language on the crude oil export ban that is discussed extensively later on in the article but does not appear in the lead.

Content

The article appears to be fairly comprehensive as it offers information on the creation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, policies on energy efficiency, and offers a lengthy discussion on the crude oil export ban that lasted until 2015. However, it seems the law is a lot more broad than the article describes and many policies appear to be missing. Content appears to be up to date but the main article includes no mention of the law's legislative history other than similar policies had been supported by previous presidents and cabinet members. There is a brief overview of the legislative history on the right side of the Wikipedia page, but beyond that, no other information is shared.

Tone and Balance

The article does a good job balancing the subject, especially considering the fact that energy policies are very contentious at times. When citing claims made by politicians about the provisions within the law, the author stipulates whether or not these claims are supported by evidence.

Sources and References

The sources included by the author are relevant and the author pulls from a variety of sources to avoid bias. Many sources included by the author are from the last decade and all of the links are functioning as intended.

Organization and writing quality

The article is well written and does not appear to contain any grammatical errors or misspellings. The article is organized in a way that is concise and flows naturally.

Images and Media

There are no images included in the article.

Talk page discussion

The talk page includes only one comment that claims the article is vastly understating how large the law is in scope as it omits many policy areas. While the other provisions the article mentions are included, those provisions are not the only ones included in the law. The article has a C-class and Low-importance rating.

Overall impressions

Overall, the organization and structure of the article is strong and the writing is concise. An area for improvement would be to include more information on the omitted provisions contained within the law and a lengthy discussion on the legislative history of the law. To sum, the article is well-written but would benefit from more detail.