User:Mph105/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.


 * Title of Article: Water pollution
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because, my focus of study for this project is about how local watersheds have been affected by natural disasters... which in some cases can lead to water pollution. Therefore, gaining more background knowledge will help me with future studies.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead does contain some concise points however, some parts are overly detailed.

Lead evaluation
Overall, this article lead contained article topic in a manner that the reader could comprehend. It does include a brief description of the article's major sections and gives a few details in a concise manner. This lead does not contain information not in the article and is overall detailed in the descriptions given. Some of these descriptions however, could get a little wordy.

Contents

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Seems to be
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No

Content evaluation
The content of this article is relevant to the topic at hand. It describes each aspect that goes into water pollution and includes details about them. The content of this article does seem to be up-to-date and does not seem to have any missing content. This article does not seem to deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * no

Tone and balance evaluation
This article is a neutral article that states facts about water pollution and includes details of how to identify the pollution that has taken place. There seems to be no viewpoints that are bias or over represented.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes

Sources and references evaluation
Each fact within this article are backed up by a secondary source and the links to the available literature are available. These related articles do in-fact relate to the topic of the main article, are up-to-date and contain a mixture of authors.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * not really
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes

Organization evaluation
This article seems to be well written and advised before being published... the main points of this article overall support the major topic.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I am pretty sure they do
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * yes

Images and media evaluation
The images within this article seem to adhere to the copyright regulations. They are well captioned and include links to the original source. They were also laid out in a somewhat appealing way.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Just about images within the article and different descriptions that could be added to them.
 * maps were also given.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * B class class article, that is level 4 vital article
 * Wiki Projects include: Sanitation, Project Water, and Project Environment.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This article builds upon the foundation of information we learned in class. It details important information.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * This article did contain appropriate information and described in detail the corrects points about water pollution.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Includes the details about each type of water pollution and the factors that play into it.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article did seem to be a little text heavy. So reducing that would help the overall appeal of the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Well developed article

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: