User:Malco060/sandbox

Climate Change:

References: The first paragraph is cited at the very end and this cites the whole paragraph, but is fairly ambiguous and could be cited better. The second paragraph is totally un-cited and could be improved. The remainder of the article is very well cited and seems to be well done.

Relevance: All portions are relevant to the overarching topic of climate change, whether it is defining, identifying cause, or otherwise.

Neutral: Yes, the article is neutral. The only potentially controversial portion is where it defines global warming, but it only defines the term and does not give opinion. View points were equally represents.

Information Neutral: All sources seem to be neutral and from reliable sources. The links I tried were functional. Many led to books so I could not actually read them, so I could not comment on close paraphrasing within the article. Websites that were cited could be reached and did not exhibit close paraphrasing. It did cite other wikipedia articles and these were not close paraphrased. I am unsure why the author cited the wikipedia page and not the original source. This could invalidate the page. These are simple additional references though, so it is not a big deal.

Semi-protection: This makes sense due to a lot of public contention about the article. The semi-protection allows for people that have made a wikipedia account and made comments on other articles to dissuade people from making biased and politically charged comments.

Talk Page: The talk page discusses the overall high quality of the article and the types of articles that link to it. It is a delisted good article, so it is no longer considered a good article. It is a B-Class Article.

Effects of climate change on plant biodiversity:

References: This article is highly cited and every part seems to be backed up by references.

Relevance: All portions seem to be important to the theme. One picture of flora at Glacier National Park was referenced to be at risk due to climate change, but that is the only thing not directly related.

Neutral: All information in the article seems neutral as no opinions are given. Viewpoints were equally represented.

Information Neutral: The references found were from neutral and reliable sources. All of the references did not exhibit close paraphrasing.

Talk Page: This is a class C article with low importance. On the talk page, many people were discussing topics to add to the page, like seed vaults and the rate of climate change.

Climate Change and Agriculture:

References: This article is heavily cited with 113 citations. However, many parts that are describing the potential effects of climate change are undercited and need citations.

Relevance: All information presented seems to be relevant to the effect of climate change and agriculture and vice versa. Much of the other topics relate to pests and insects, which are intertwined with both climate change and agriculture. These are not 100% relevant, but its important to not their effects so I think it is good to include.

Neutral: This article is neutral and gives facts about the phenomena, but does not comment on viewpoints or favor one over the other.

Information Neutral: A large portion of the sources cited can no longer be reached from the page. The ones that can be found are from neutral and sound sources. Overall, these sources should be changed to be more accessible and broekn links should be fixed.

Talk Page: This is a B class page with a high importance rating. The discussion on the page has been on whether or not the article should be a climate change or global warming article. Other issues include fact checking, including proper definitions, and decreasing ambiguity.