User:Oscott101/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
San Joaquin Valley

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 to evaluate this article because it is a very well-written article, focusing are several main points, and supporting those points with sources. I also chose this article because I believe there can be impactful additions as well.

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.)

This article has a good lead section, with room for some improvement. The first paragraph clearly explains what the San Joaquin Valley is. However, it does not include a brief description of the article’s major sections. Rather, it explains the history of the Valley. I believe the lead section is overly detailed in the history of the San Joaquin Valley. At the same time, I think it is important to go over historical events that brought the San Joaquin Valley to life. Overall, the content is well covered in each subsection of the article. The article’s content is clearly relevant to the topic, and the content covers geography, agriculture, and climate, all related to the San Joaquin Valley. Some of the content is up-to-date, while other content is not. The most recent dates are around 2015, seven years ago. However, many of the sources are used from 2015, all the way up to 2019. The sources in this article are cited, and used effectively. They are current sources, and are easily accessible to the reader. There is also a balanced point of view as the topic is not overly biased towards any side. The organization and writing quality are good, with the information being organized and well-written. There are also several pictures in the article, giving us a visual for some of the information being presented. For example, there are pictures of the San Joaquin Valley, as well as charts for numerical information. When reading through the talk page, I can see there are statements that seem to be inaccurate, like about oil pumps, methane gas, and landholdings in the South and Midwest. These were, however, seemed inaccurate solely for the northern San Joaquin Valley.

Overall, this is a well-written article. There are sources than are cited and used effectively throughout, as well as keeping a balanced tone, viewing all perspectives. However, there are a few statements in the article that could use some improvement. I believe the C-class rating on this article is the correct rating.