User:Madagascar20/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.


 * History of water supply and sanitation: History of water supply and sanitation
 * Sanitation, health issues, and the environment are very important to the viability of every human and this article goes into the history of sanitation and watcher supply, which I find fascinating.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
This article incorporates a well established timeline of the history of water usage and sanitization throughout the world and the impact its has on human health. It discusses the sewage systems, cleanliness, re usage, transportation, and importance of water during the Bronze and early Iron Ages, medieval and early modern ages, and modern age. The article wraps up with taking about present water filtration and sanitization methods that are used in the 21st century and beyond.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The articles content is very relevant to the topic and includes many citations and accurate historical information which is up to date. They could have added a more surrounding the topic of the importance of water in cities and to human health rather than just stating how they got their water and used it for sanitization. They also could have incorporated how water has and is still not evenly distributed amongst populations, leaving underrepresented and marginalized peoples with poorer access and sanitation. Sanitation is in the title of this article, however it is not discussed very much, not nearly as much as water resources and plumbing systems are.

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
The tone is neutral and does not have any explicit biases because the topic is more factual rather than something that can be opinionated. I think that there could be more information on the access to water amongst the different populations present in the regions that they discussed in the article, however I do not believe the author tried to persuade the reader in any way.

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?
 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
Yes, the article is backed up with reliable sources for the factual statements that were made and included many in text links to many of the works used to give more insight on sanitization terminology and more information on historical time periods and events. I used a few different sources that were provided to clarify that the links worked and were related to the words they were associated with. I found many of the links to be useful throughout the article and the sources were written by a diverse group of authors on Wikipedia. The article did not discuss marginalized individuals much and therefore did not have many resources or links pertaining to historically marginalized individuals.

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
The article is well written with an appropriate summary at the top and a chronological timeline of the history of water supply and sanitation. I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors within the article, it seemed very well worded and carefully edited.

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 are quite a few images used pertaining to multiple topics discussed within the article that help the reader have a better understanding of the water and sewer systems used in cities and old tools used to potable water. Every image does have a citation and description and adheres to the copyright regulations. All of the images align with the section of reading that they correlate with and are visually apealing with the layout of the webpage.

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
On the talk page there is a lot of talk surrounding blacklist links that are embedded in the article, I did not find any myself however it seems to be an issue for a few different individuals. There is also discussion about changing the title of the article to not include the word 'sanitation' because the lack of content and discussion surrounding water sanitization.

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
Overall, there was good factual information surrounding the history of water supply and was well written and laid out in the article, however sanitization was briefly talked about and not as present in the article as the name alludes it to be. A strength is the detail that is covered pertaining to the historical timeline and usage of water and how it was supplied to different regions of the world during multiple time periods. However the name is not appropriate for the article as it eludes that there is more information on sanitation than there actually is in the article.

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: Talk:History of water supply and sanitation