User:Kslaguidao/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Juneau gold belt

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen to evaluate this article because I was intrigued to find Wikipedia articles about Alaska classified as "C-class" and I wanted to read one about Juneau. Considering the fact that I was born here in Juneau, I was more enticed to learn more about Juneau's gold belt, as I am surprisingly not as informed about Juneau's gold mining history and geography as I would perceive. At a first glance, I was surprised by the length of the article, considering how Juneau's gold mining history is so heavily implemented in Juneau's current tourist attractions.

Lead Section
In regards to the lead section, the article opens with a fairly brief description of the Juneau gold belt in relation to its size, location, and the mineral deposits it holds. Each piece of information from the lead section can be traced back in the body of the article, but the initial introductory sentence of the section is severely lacking in the aspect of a "hook". The introductory sentence does not grab me as a reader nor is it concise or descriptive enough to accurately describe the article's topic. The lead section can also include more details about the Juneau gold belt's history, as this section was not represented in the lead section at all.

 Content 

Content wise, the article provides the base and necessary information about the Juneau gold belt in regards to its history, geography, and geology. There is one section, the "Flora" section of the article, that I personally believe should not be included in the article, as it provides very little significant information to the topic and consists of only one sentence. In the other body sections, the information is more condensed rather than thorough, which can make the article harder to digest for some readers. I would suggest having the content found in these sections extended; explain more about the information provided so that the content can be processed easier and so that the article does not undercut any details that may have been missing before. Also, in the "Geology" section of the article, there are few sentences in quotations that do not show any signs that they are quotes from a specific person or source. If these sentences are quotes, the person or source that it came from should be established within the article.

 Tone and Balance 

One of the positives from the article comes from its point-of-view, as the article is a neutral and informative piece that does not have any underlying biases or agendas within it.

 Organization and Writing Quality 

As discussed previously, there are a few sentences found in the "Geology" section that are not specified as exact quotes; which, if they are, should be properly acknowledged with the person or source that it came from. In regards to the writing quality, there are no clear grammatical errors, but there are issues with the article's pacing; as many pieces of information within the article are condensed within each section. This condensed presentation of information causes the article to not be as concise as it can be, which hinders the overall quality of the article. Solutions to these problems can be found in my "Content" evaluation.

 Sources and References 

After going over the sources and references of the article, I noticed that much of the sources came from many written documents dated near the time of the Juneau gold belt's discovery and its mining developments. These sources enhance the credibility of the article, as the written documents are first-hand accounts and observations of the area. These accounts and observations provide significantly more thorough information to use for the article's content and improves the article's overall authenticity. In regards to the current day, I am unable to provide insight if the information from the documents still hold up to today's environment and scientific discoveries.

 Images and Media 

In regards to the images used in the article, all of them followed Wikipedia's copyright regulations and many of them were captioned simply by the geographical area's common name, which I believe is enough information for these specific images. In regards to the presentation of the images, I personally believe that they could have been structured in a more visually appealing way; especially the images used in the "Geology" section. One critique I would add to improve the article's image presentation is to provide a precise visual of the Juneau gold belt on a map. There was no such thing in the article and I believe placing such an image near the lead section will enhance the article's overall quality and help reinforce the information provided about the Juneau gold belt's location.

 Talk Page Discussion 

In the talk page of the article, there were no discussions posted by any Wikipedians in regards to the article's content, but there was a post made by the "InternetArchiveBot" from December 2, 2017 that detailed one of the external links being modified. Also found in the talk page, it appears that this article has been a part of three WikiProjects (WikiProject Geology, WikiProject Alaska, WikiProject Mining) and has also had a fact featured on Wikipedia's "Did you know?" column on its Main Page.

 Overall Impressions 

After reading and analyzing this article, I believe that it does its job of informing readers about the Juneau gold belt, but to a minimal degree. I believe that the information provided in the article can be extended and written more thoroughly, which can allow more details from first-hand sources to be included. In regards to its strengths, the article did an excellent job of sticking to an unbiased and informative approach that great Wikipedia articles are accustomed to. Overall, this article has a great foundation to becoming a much more detailed piece that can greatly exceed its original presentation.