User:Maia.soderlund/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Dead zone (ecology)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The reason why I choose this article is because dead zones are something that have always been of interest. The term "eutrophication" is what is associated with dead zones, which is where there is a lack of oxygen in the water due to access runoff and other excessive nutrients that cause a dis-balance in the overall health of the ecosystem. This is something that matters because of the loss of habitat which leads to the death of many species. It is easier for fish to remove themselves from this area, but plants and other smaller organisms suffer greatly. These dead zones can negatively impact the economy along with the health of humans. If one finds themselves in a dead zone, there is a risk of disease.

Evaluate the article
Everything in this article is relevant to the topic, nothing in particular distracted me from the overall idea. There doesn't seem to be anything that is out of date, but there could be dead zones that can be added to this page in terms of location. I cannot identify any notable equity gaps, but it would be helpful to bring up further historical research as not much is provided. There could be added sources to further back up what is said on this article. I was told that having at least two articles linked in a sentence would be ideal, and some sentences don't have any articles linked to them.

There is some comments that would classify as biased toward dead zones. It is just the wording of some of the sentences that are questionable. I don't believe anything is overrepresented, however, bringing in more information about the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 could possibly be beneficial. Like coming back to how this has impacted us now.

Something I see is that a lot of wikipedia work is referenced in this article. It does support the claims that are made, but are these ideas actually credible? A lot of the articles I am clicking on bring me to another wikipedia article, so maybe bringing in other research from other sources could be beneficial as we are unsure if the wikipedia articles are fully credible. There are diverse array of authors for these articles, but again, credibility wise, I am unsure if it is smart to include so many wikipedia articles, without including other sources.

There is quite a bit of edits and talk behind the scenes from others. It is rated C-class and is apart of several other WikiProjects such as limnology and oceanography, ecology, environment, and so on.