User:Mander.M/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Geology of the Northwest Territories

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because it relates to the course material as it focuses on the geologic history of the Northwest Territories. The Northwest Territories have a very different geologic history compared to the rest of Canada due to their geographic location and how they are further up North. My preliminary impression of the article was that it is quite short with only a handful of references, however, it does include detailed content.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.

The lead section introduces what the article entails. It concisely provides a description of what the sub-headings of the article are. The introductory sentence is well-written and does well at introducing the topic. The lead section provides basic information, which is then further expanded upon throughout the rest of the article. All the information is relevant to the topic of the article.

Due to the short length of the article, the content is very concise and stays on topic. There are no distractions that lead away from the main idea. The information in the article is mainly about the past due to the content being about geologic history. This is why a large amount of the content is from many years ago. The citations depict that the information is not recent and it is from older articles.

The article does not produce any bias as it focuses solely on facts. This is why it is extremely neutral. The article is not persuasive in any way and is only informational.

Based on the length of the article, there are a good amount of references. The links to the references work. A majority of the citations are articles that have been published by scholarly publications and researchers, however, the articles are not up to date. Many of the citations are linked to articles from the late 1900's. Although the citations are not very recent, the sources are reliable and do not show bias because they come from science publications. The articles are not written by very diverse authors because it appears they were only written by individuals who specialize in science and geology.

The article is well organized and provides sub-headings to make it easier to read. They spelling and grammar is accurate throughout the article. The article does not incorporate any images about the topic.

The talk page of this article is completely empty and there have been no conversations about this article. I believe this has occurred because the article is very short and to the point. It only incorporates facts so there was nothing to discuss on the talk page. The article is a part of WikiProject Geology and it is supported by WikiProject Canada, as well as WikiProject Canadian Territories. It appears that Wikipedia does not give a high importance to this topic

To conclude, the article is rated as C-class and is not given much importance on Wikipedia. I like how the article is very clear and concise. It does not include too much information and only focuses on the important aspects of the topic. The article can be improved by using some new citations to add more current information. It would also be more appealing if there were some images or diagrams to support the content of the article. I believe the article is underdeveloped because there can still be much more information added to it.