User:Leshnemr/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: Environmental science
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. - I have chosen this article to evaluate because environmental sciences are a huge aspect of public health. All of the subsets of environmental sciences can contribute to public health.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? - Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? - Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? - No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? - May be slightly too detailed. It's a decent sized opening to an article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? - Yes, quite a bit of information for the various subsets of environmental health.
 * Is the content up-to-date? - The content doesn't seem to be extremely up to date. The most recent source is from around 2010 I believe, but the talk page is still decently active.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - Some of the paragraphs seem to be unnecessary and repetitive. The component sections of this article seem to get straight to the point and I like that there's an example under each to further the learning possibilities from this reading.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? - Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? - I don't notice any bias towards any part in particular in this article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? - I think all sections seems to be even besides the first section being longer than the rest. It goes into detail about the topic just enough to the point that it's not "too much".
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? - I don't think this article attempts to persuade the reader in any way. Every section seems to be facts on the specific topic.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? - All topics are linked to other articles directly which I found very useful and helpful to understand the information more in depth.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? - Yes
 * Are the sources current? - Mostly. Some are a little older.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? - Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? - No. Not that I noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? - Yes. This article is organized well.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? - Yes. The photos made me think of everything that can relate to each topic throughout the article.
 * Are images well-captioned? - Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? - Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes. They wrap around the article throughout which makes it not seem as long.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? - There are editors that think there is a lot missing from certain sections throughout the article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? - It's rated a C and is involved in multiple WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? - We haven't talked much specifically about this topic in class. The more I go through this article there seems to be missing pieces.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths? - There's a lot of people who have worked on this. There's a lot of valid sources to go off of.
 * How can the article be improved? - I think the article can be improved by it being completely tied together and some information being added into a few of the sections. The photos could also be updated to be more recent and relatable.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? - This article is definitely well developed. It looks like at one point it was completely redone from the beginning. It needs to be more cohesive.

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 — ~

- The images in this article could be updated to be more relatable and current. The images should be able to help gain a more in-depth understanding and example for each topic throughout the article.Leshnemr (talk) 03:18, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Link to feedback: