User:Lax.girl.2003/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Social and environmental impact of palm oil

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

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.)


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, I like how the first two sentences bring in the social piece into the article. It talks about the families that use it and what it is used for
 * Does the lead includes a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * I see there being room for improvement here. The intro says how it's bad the last half of the last sentence maybe they need to be more concise and break that down.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
 * No, it doesn't. It's like a baby view into the larger bulk of the content
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It seems very short and brief to me- not over detailed but there is room to dive deeper and connect social and environmental rather than leave them are two separate concepts


 * s the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, I like how there are subcategories for most of the divided content so you can deep dive into one aspect need be
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The last research I saw them use was 2000. I bet there is more data and studies now even as recently as 2010, potentially even more present than that
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Im not well versed on the topic so I am not sure if they are missing anything. But everything they had felt meaningful and relevant
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No. Not much more to say than that
 * Is the article neutral?
 * To prove the severity of the topic, I understand it would be odd to put in a rebuttal into your own article maybe show a different perspective like a companies perspective so you come off more neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * All of it? I mean the entire deforestation section convinces a reader to see how bad palm oil is.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The “use of sustainable palm oil by companies” section would have been perfect to include with a company's perspective as to why they continue using palm oil. Then the reader could have decided for themselves if the companies using it sustainably show are doing it right
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * I am not sure- In social issues maybe they could of taken more time to explain how a fragile economy and a community of struggling people rely on the industry for palm oil even though its bad
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No
 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Obviously, I couldn't click every single link but the few I did were from .Govs, >orgs, or other trusted pages
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Again, I am not sure I do not know anything about this topic so I don't know what better literature is out there
 * Are the sources current?
 * There's a lot of wiggle room to use far more updated statistics and studies because most of them are from 2000 and before
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Again, I cannot click every link that comes along every few words, but it's not like any author jumped out at me. It's not apparent that they went out o their way to included marginalized authors and perspectives.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * Updated sources will for sure have better information. There was an article published in 2021 with all of the new data findings for palm oil impact, “Palm oil: Our World in Data”. Those new statistics and findings probably don't align with some of your 1990 sources
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Clicked 10 links, they all worked.
 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It was easy to read, the language used was a nice way to break down hard, larger concepts. This made it easy to read
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I noticed but I am dyslexic so I am not the best judgment
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * “Other environmental issues” feels like a category that smushed together some leftover ideas
 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There are imagines included,  in the sustainability section, they are used the best to make a message
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Some of them are much more detailed with links and dates while others are basic line sentences
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes,
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There wasn't much interaction since the fall up until recently when one of our students edited it
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It doesn't seem to be connected to any Wikiporjects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not talked much about the connection between social and environmental impacts and their relation and impact on one another
 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Seems to be developed with good information but not super deep. Every section could add more, recent data
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * I learned something new so I think it was informative but in an understandable way. Being easy to read is one of their biggest strengths
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Use updated statistics and data from within a few years. Use every section to tell a story in pictures more than just the sustainability section
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I felt I gained and learned something new so I think that a good way to know if it was well developed. The sections feel complete because they used stats and multiple forms of information so it felt diverse