User:Lkmjos/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.


 * Stormwater Harvesting: Stormwater harvesting
 * Harvesting stormwater has implications for drought stricken areas and communities, as well as ecological implications through mitigation of stormwater runoff.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * The Lead briefly introduces the concept of stormwater harvesting in general terms.
 * The Lead does not reference material that will be covered by the article.
 * No it appears to introduce information
 * The Lead is moderately concise but is not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Content is mostly relevant to the topic
 * Its hard to evaluate whether the information is up to date. There are few sources and they are not dated.
 * There is not much detailed information regarding topics such as pollution mitigation and filtration.
 * The article does not directly deal with equity gaps, although this article and topic could be applied to highlight stormwater harvest as a viable option for water-stressed populations around the world.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article reads fairly neutral in its tone, with no claims that stand out as heavily biased toward a particular position. Challenges to stormwater harvest do factor heavily in the article, ie there are many mentions of why stormwater is unviable and economically unpopular. I do not feel the article attempts to sway reader opinion in one way or another.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The sources in this article are generally slim. While there are several links throughout the article, there are four cited sources, and these sources are not exactly peer-reviewed literature. Sources are slightly outdated-at least seven years old. Sources seem to be somewhat singular and don't appear to include marginalized peoples. Links do work, though sometimes linked to unspecific sources that are not especially relevant to this particular topic.


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

This article is moderately well written. It is concise but not especially clear or easy to read. I find sentences with minor grammatical and spelling errors, but more specifically sentences that do not flow within a paragraph, or should be rewritten for better syntax. The organization of the article appears to be a sufficient starting place- being mostly unfamiliar with the topic I am not sure whether there are sections that are missing.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

There is a very rudimentary image of one type of stormwater harvest. The image is very basic in nature, simply captioned. It does not provide an advanced understanding of the topic, but it definitely does not detract from understanding. The image appears to be an original production and adheres to copyright regulations. There is only one image and its layout and place within the article is neutral. The article ends with a direct quote from a source, rather than a paraphrasing of the information. Though this is cited, this may be an infringement of Wiki copyright regulations.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There is a general list of potential sources in the talk page, which were apparently not all useful for the article since there are only four cited sources. There is a general comment, as a review, that encourages more content and context of stormwater harvest. The article is rated Stub class, and it is a part of WikiProject Water, Urban studies and planning, Architecture, and others in decreasing importance.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

This article feels like a decent start at a topic of marginal interest. With more developed content and updated sources this article could be strengthened as a resource on this topic. The article can be improved for clarity and grammatical errors, including punctuation and spelling. This article is not well-developed but could serve as a starting platform for further content and resources.


 * 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?

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: