User:LeahJones13/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Sustainability studies
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * It is a topic that has been quite a substantial point of discussion in the news and media lately and I decided to take a look into it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it does include an introductory sentence that gives some background and idea of what the topic is about.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No it does not.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise and detailed but not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
Response: After reading this article, I believe that the articles content is relevant to the topic and does a good job with creating an up-to-date summary. However, I will say that I believe the page could very much be built upon as it is quite short and it is definitely a topic that has much research being done on it. So, the article is definitely up to date but it could be built upon. Furthermore, the content of this article is based upon current knowledge proposed in the news however, it does not consider any other side to this conversation that sees positive improvements within the world in respect to building a sustainable future. Therefore, I would say that this article provides a sturdy foundation for further content. but is quite incomplete.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
This article is not written in a neutral manner as it only considers the climate activists stance on climate change. This article is supposed to look at sustainability as a whole and then maybe it would be appropriate to acknowledge potential drawbacks in terms of global contributions to building a sustainable future or lack there of. There are heavy claims that are positioned on a climate activists viewpoint that quite radically proposes that the governments of the world have not contributed or ignored the necessity for addressing climate change. Therefore, this viewpoint is represented adequately, however this means that the positive progressions or other aspects of this debate are underrepresented. This may be considered persuasive to some consumers who do not have any previous knowledge of climate change its relationship with sustainability because this article alone appears to reiterate the doom and gloom rather than analyze and factually facilitate knowledge on sustainability.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The facts provided are cited and backed up by a reliable secondary source of information, however because the Guardian is a news organization, this source of information is not a direct reflection of the literature available on this topic. The reputability of the Guardian is positive and proposed to be written without bias, however sustainability is a scientific and political matter that needs the information derived by the scientific method in order to sustain claims made about environmental status. Using a peer reviewed source that employed the scientific method would be a fantastic way of curating information that was factual and less opinion or empirical. Not that empirical in not reputable but rather with such precise scientific discussion it is important that that kind of information is given exactly for what it is. The links provided are current, but they rely heavily on the Guardian for sourcing. I should also note that the links do work!

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
This article is written sufficiently but it does not appear refined or succinct. The flow of the article makes sense chronologically but it does not assess or address matters in a way that appears objective. The article is broken down in a way that organizes the content available. However, there is quite a bit missing from this article that is not addressed so I can not say that it is broken down in sections that reflect the major points of the topic. It needs to be heavily edited and worked on in order to take what is there and to refine it to work towards a place that gives the reader information that is reliable and professional.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There is only one image within the article that does not enhance the article. It is a picture of the world and it is well captioned and adheres to wikipedias copyright regulations. The image is positioned in a way that is complementary to the text and looks nice but is not a necessity. I believe to make use of images in this article, it would be beneficial to provide readers with various graphs or tables that supplement, statistical or proposed environmental shifts in order to strengthen information.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page of this article has not been contributed to too since 2018, however there are various changes in the history of the article that are addressing issues within the article. Prior to recent activity, the article had not been talked within since 2018. It is important to not that the project is a part of the Wikiproject environment that is proposed to improve wikipedia's coverage of the environment and Wikiproject higher education that improves coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. Wikipedia looks to keep neutrality and educate, which are values we have discussed thoroughly in this class thus far. However, this wikipedia page in itself, discusses climate change and sustainability different than how we have discussed it in class because not all angles of the discussion are considered and equally represented. As understood in class, climate change has been subject to much debate within the news and has been through various instances of astroturfing and bias within the portrayal to the public. To build on this, this wikipedia page really only looks from an environmentalist perspective which although is increasingly more sound as information surrounding climate change is becoming known to scientists. However, in order to write from an objective point of view, as understood in class, which in this case would be providing facts and not opinion based claims/arguments, it is immanent the contributor seek out articles that convey information that is fact and evidence based. This, alongside using language that does not appear leading in any sort of way would strengthen this article immensely.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
The articles overall importance status has not been given but it is rated Stub-Class. The articles strengths are that its provides a concise summary in the lead and is well laid out and provides a table of contents. I believe the information discussed in this article extremely under referenced in terms of variation of external sources. The article could be improved by further the depth of the information being provided in taking the major points and elaborating on them in a ways that encompasses less subjectivity and engages further with neutriality. This article needs much attention and may be harmful to a reader who knows little on the subject and is looking to inform themselves. I would say this article is under-developed. I believe it provides a very baseline amount of information and does not currently posses enough content.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: