User:Mns4al/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Tule fog

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 have chosen this article because it is about an interesting phenomenon that occurs in California and I was very intrigued when I first came across it. I was also shocked at how dangerous Tule Fog is an wanted to learn more about it.

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.)

Lead Section:

The lead section is concise and clearly describes the articles topic. The article's content was relevant and contained good information.

Content:

The content was there however, it did feel as though there was a lot more that could be researched and written about this topic. The article was informative however it was underrepresented in the sense that there could have been a lot more written on the impact of tule fog, how dangerous it has been, and the specifics of where it was from and what causes it. The information was also very outdated with most sources being from the early 2000s.

Sources:

Although the article does have one source from NASA and all of the sources do work when clicked on, a lot of the links are from the Los Angeles Times which seemed like the article relied too much on one source for information.

Tone and Balance:

The tone was very academic and neutral, only explaining facts and not trying to persuade the readers of anything.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The article is well written and concise and has been divided up into sections nicely. It does not have any noticeable grammar or spelling errors.

Images and Media:

There are not too many images or media however, the images included did fit the article and it's content nicely.

Talk Page:

There are a couple suggestions in the talk page about maybe expanding one of the sections of the article to include more information and discussions are to whether the information presented in the article was correct. The article has been given mid to low importance and has been rated as a Start Class project.

Overall impressions:

The article was overall decent, it was concise and does give some good information however, the content of the article could be improved and expanded upon.