User:Madisoncamille23/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 Science
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article to learn about properly written wikipedia articles while evaluating the content as a student of conservation biology.

Lead
The lead did include an introductory sentence that was concise and covered the articles topic. The lead did include a description of some of the articles major sections while excluding others. The lead is very concise and does include some information that is not in the article as it is used to help the reader understand sustainability science.

Content
The content is relevant to the topic, up-to-date, and I do not feel there is any content that is missing or does not belong.

Tone and Balance
The article has a very neutral tone with no claims that seem heavily biased. There are no viewpoints that are overly discussed. There is no attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position over another.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

All of the facts in the article seem to be backed up by reliable sources, the sources did seem to be thorough. The sources are current and working.

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is very well-written in a very didactic style. There are very few grammatical and spelling errors, and the article is well organized and broken down into sections that make sense.

Images and Media
There is no use of images to enhance the understanding of the topics.

Checking the talk page
There are conversations about renaming the article as well as changing where the article is listed, so rather being in sustainability science it would be under environmental science. It is apart of WikiProject Environment/Sustainability, WikiProject Science, and WikiProject Universities. This article is rated as a start-class article. This wikipedia page discusses mainly further schooling for sustainability science and the history or policy rather than discussing ecosystem dynamics and services.

Overall impressions
Overall the article is very well written and easy to understand. The articles main strengths are in the language used, however, it could be improved by discussing the objectives more thoroughly. I would assess the completeness of this article as underdeveloped as it seems to still need some bulk added.