User:Mbrown2098/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: Biocentrism (ethics)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because I am very interested in different approaches to environmentalism and environmental philosophy. I am also taking Environmental Ethics, and this article relates directly to some of the material covered in that class. I also think that environmental ethics are very important when discussing climate change because they help shape the policies that are created to combat the climate crisis.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The Lead has an introductory sentence that is clear and concise.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead does not have a description of the article's sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead mentions the terms "deep ecology" and "left biocentrism", which are not mentioned at any other point in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is almost too concise. The Lead should probably contain more descriptive sentences of what exactly biocentrism is, as well as some definitions for the key phrases and terms that are introduced.

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article's content appears up to date; however, it is missing some crucial information regarding the legal standing of nature in some parts of the world. For example, a river in New Zealand was recently given all the legal rights and responsibilities of person-hood, an act that is certainly reflective of biocentric ethics. The article content is largely relevant to its main topic.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article seems to be written with a neutral point-of-view, but there is one particular instance of apparent bias. As written, the sentence "[t]he environment is seen for what it is; the biosphere within which we live and depend on its diversity for our health" is one that certainly reflects the author's point-of-view rather than a neutral one. Using the phrase "seen for what it is" implies that this form of ethics is obvious, and could potentially skew the reader's thoughts towards a certain position.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The article does have a variety of referenced sources, most of which appear to be reliable; however, there is a notice in the "In Religion" section stating that some of the referenced sources may not be reliable. Largely, the authors reference appropriate essays and articles regarding biocentrism, and the article represents the current and available literature. The available links do work.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is definitely well-written. The phrasing is concise and not distracting, with minimal grammatical and spelling errors. The article has relevant sections that break down the major points of the topic, but some sections have much more content than others.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article does not include any images.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The talk page for this article is full of interesting and relevant conversations. Many users seem to be interested in improving this article, and have clear conversations on the talk page about how to collaborate to improve the article. The article is part of WikiProject Environment, WikiProject Philosophy, and WikiProject Ecology.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article does a good job at providing clear and concise information about the topic. In some cases, the articles is a bit too concise, and some expanding is needed, especially in the "Relationship with animals and environment" and "In law" sections. The article seems to be a good one, but it is slightly under-developed, and could use some more references.


 * 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?

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: