User:JonnyZzzz/Evaluate an Article

Article Evaluating:

Environmental science

Evaluating content:


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Yes, the sections addressed were relevant to the topic. The components section was also very well crafted, as it explained each topic in a brief but informative manner. Nothing was distracting.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * All information is up to date. If anything, different examples could be used rather than "computer models" twice for chemistry and atmospheric sciences. It feels a little repetitive. May more details about the difference in the models could differentiate between them.
 * What else could be improved?
 * If anything maybe more component sections could be added, since in the introduction many components were listed but only a select few were addressed. I feel this would connect the page more to other articles.

Evaluating tone:


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes the article is neutral with no claims that appear heavily biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, the editor did a fantastic job keeping viewpoints out of the topic and using a voice that only addressed the topic at hand.

Evaluating sources:


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Yes, the links I checked worked. The sources used support the claims made in the article.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Yes, each fact stated is followed up with a citation of the source used. The information comes from reliable-neutral sources. No bias was noted.

Checking the talk page:


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Conversations have been going on from 2005 to 2019. They are trying to better the article and discuss what is relevant or not relevant.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated C-class and is part of the Wikiprojects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It is more heavily researched and has more discussion of topics. It has plenty of suggestions that allows for editors to consider multiple viewpoints; similar to how our Online classes requiring us to respond to others posts to give feedback.