User:Laujmbc/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Jason (ROV)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The ROV Jason is what my group is named after. It is a remotely operated vehicle that can collect data from the deep sea. I found it really interesting as I have never been exposed to deep sea research and the vast capabilities of data collection that it can be involved in was really interesting to me.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section: Gave a good introductory sentence on the topic that was concise and clear. It does not have a brief description of the major sections, but the sections follow a chronological like order so still make sense. Overall, a very concise lead that summarizes the article well.

Content: The content was very in-depth and describe the topic well. The data appears to be relatively up to date with some references being published about a year ago. It could include content on the data that is collected and how it allows for increased equity and accessibility to deep sea research.

Tone and Balance: Overall the article is well written and neutral in tone. There is no form of argumentation but rather the statement of facts that is derived from various sources. The article does lack the mention of the lack of representation in deep sea research and how the Jason can be used to mitigate such gaps.

Sources and References: All the facts have reliable sources that are thorough and current. References range from when the Jason was built to present day. All the links work. However, there does not seem to be historically marginalized individual authors.

Organization and Writing Quality: The article is well written, concise, and easy to read, with no errors. The organization is alright, but could have been split up a bit more possibly. The title of the sections could have been changed to be a little more representative.

Images and Media: Images were well captioned and high quality. However, it would be nice if they were included within the article rather than at the end.

Talk Page Discussion: There was one comment that highlighted the issues of the page. It seemed to be a professional in the field that knew a lot about the Jason. They provided additional resources to make the article better. The article is not part of any WikiProjects. The conversations focus more on the very specific wording of the article rather than the topic itself.

Overall Impressions: Overall, the article was very well written and neutral. It was very indepth of the history of the Jason. The organization could be improves to include more images within the text rather than at the end. Also the inclusion of topics related to historically marginalized communities would be really good. The article is well developed and could used some small edits overall to make it really good.