User:Mattwells5/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: Salmon Conservation (Salmon conservation)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have chosen this article because my major is environmental studies, so i am very interested in sustainability and conservation. This article is something i can relate to in my studies, which could help me edit this article.

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

 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?: The article includes a lead which had a sentence that does describe the articles topic, and why this topic is important. The introduction also describe why conservation is needed and the consequences of habitat loss to the wild salmon. This describes the focus point of the article in the first sentence, which salmon conservation is needed to mitigate the impacts and risk of habitat loss.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?: Somewhat, The article does a good enough job of introducing the topic, however the article talks about habitat degradation and lists a few factors, which are not really talked about in the article or expanded on. If anything they are just listed again with no background as to why they impact the habitat. The article does give a brief description of the traditional methods versus a new method, which the article does focus on. I would have expected the article to talk more about the causes and importance of addressing habitat loss much more.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?: I would say that the lead includes information that is only briefly mentioned, when you would expect the article to address it more, such as habitat loss implications.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?: The lead is concise, in that it presents the information in an order that makes sense. The salmon population is being harmed from habitat loss, and there is a new movement for conservation which could be more effective then traditional methods.

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?

Content evaluation

 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?: The articles content is relevant to the topic. It talks about how the salmon population began to decline, as well as the policies put in place to conserve the salmon population from dangerously low numbers. The article also talks about potential, and more successful conservation methods that could be incorporated into conservation methods used to help protect the salmon's habitat and solve the root of the problem.
 * Is the content up-to-date?: The articles over content is still relevant, however the it seems that most of the information gathered for this article was done so about 9 years ago. With environmental conservation a more important topic then ever, there are lots of examples of different conservation techniques and regulations put in place to protect salmon and fish population. This article could include these policies and conservation efforts, or even update on if the potential conservation methods they suggested in the article made an impact in protecting the habitat of wild salmon.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?: All content is relevant to the topic, however it think that the article should go into more depth of why the salmons habitat is important to their survival, as well as how the causes of habitat destruction and human activity has endangered the population of salmon. It would help explain why these conservation efforts are extremely important in maintaining the salmon population and why they are so important to their local ecosystem.

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

 * Is the article neutral?: The tone of this article is neutral. Reading through it i felt that the author did a good job of explain that the salmon numbers are low and that in order for their numbers to return to healthy levels again, conservation is necessary. They weren't biased in suggesting extreme cases or in disregarding the importance of conservation.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?: The only claim that i could consider biased is in the conclusion. "As Mindy Cameron wrote in a 2002 Seattle Times article, "billions of dollars have been spent to reverse declining salmon runs, with no guarantee of success. What's needed here is a new kind of public conversation about salmon and their place in our future." I think this sentance is biased in the sense that it is disregarding some very successful salmon conservation efforts. While new innovation towards possible conservation strategies are definitely needed, you still can't disregard the importance of current salmon conservation efforts that are being done.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?: I think that the potential conservation of protective sanctuary strategy is over represented. The articles title is Salmon conservation, so naturally you would conclude that it is about current methods, future methods, and the importance of it. This article does touch on those points, however i think it over represented the importance of a strategy that has no been incorporated at that time, while current methods are just as important in keeping the salmon population healthy. Both methods are importance, just in their own ways and the article should be explaining that rather then discounting current methods, or a potentially more successful one.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?: I would say no. The article does talk about of importance new methods are for solving the root of the problem, but i would not consider it persuasion, maybe just an optimistic claim.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?: Some are from reputable sources, however there are a couple which seems to not be that reliable. It hard to tell, since a lot of them are outdated, and some of these sources did not maintain their sites or information well.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?: Yes, all the sources represent what was discussed in the topic, including conservation cases and efforts. All sources focused on the conservation of salmon or were related to the topic of salmon.
 * Are the sources current?: No, the sources are fairly old, with some being more then a decade old. One is even 20 years old. With lots of current information on environmental conservation, there are lots of reputable sources that could have some very useful insight on this topic.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?: Of the two sites in the references with links, only one of them worked. The links on the texts work.

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

 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?: Yes the article is concise, clear and easy to read. The language was not confusing and the writing made the topic clear throughout the article.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?: Reading through it i only saw one grammatical error. There were some sentences that would be reworded, but nothing of significance.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?: Yes the sections int eh article were well organized and they reflected a good flow to address the major points of the topic, as well address how the salmon's population became so endangered, as well as what can be done to help restore their numbers. It address the why, when, where, what and how throughout the article.

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

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?: No the article does not include any images that enhance the understanding of the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned?: The only imagine in the article is well captioned as it explains exactly what is going on in the image.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?: Yes all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. The copyright holder of this imagine has allowed permission under the GNU Free Documentation License.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?: No, the only imagine is in the top right of the article, which easily gets lots once you scroll down a bit and forgotten.

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

 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?: Some of the topic behind the scene are of how the wild salmons population got endangered, such as over population and the impact from dams. Other topics include discussion about the importance of hatcheries and further information on the Puget Sound Salmon Protection.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?: This article is rated Start-Class on the project's quality scale and mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article belongs to the WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?: There is a lot more information about how good of quality the article is, and the importance of this topic. There is also more information on potentially useful related information to the topic.

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

 * What is the article's overall status?: The overall status of the article is that it is the status of start. It is incomplete and a lot more relevant and useful information can be included that could greatly benefit how useful and insightful this article could become. There is just a lot of information that seems to be left out, not included, or not thought about.
 * What are the article's strengths?: The articles strength is that it does provide a viable timeline for how the salmons population got so low, and this helps demonstrate the importance of this topic as it shows how rapid of a decline the wild salmons population is.
 * How can the article be improved?: This article can be improved by adding more relevant information on how habitat destruction impact the salmon population as well as how traditional conservation methods and be incorporated or transitioned into new innovative conservation methods. This would help give the reader a sense of the cause and some possible solutions and methods that are being developed today to help restore the salmons population.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?: I would say that it is underdeveloped and incomplete. There is a lot of information that is not included, or that can be included. There is also no conclusion, the article ends abruptly with no talks about current or future regulation or policies put in place to support salmon conservation, or how all levels of the government and community leaders are working together to regeneration salmon numbers.

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: