User:Rachelkr24/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Greenhouse gas monitoring

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The article on greenhouse gas monitoring was available under the subcategory "Environmental science" and it was a topic I did not know anything about. I was able to learn how they monitor GHG levels in the biosphere and lithosphere.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this article is moderately informative. I believe it could be improved by elaborating on a few details, such as a few sentences that describe the most common method for measuring GHG levels. As it stands, the lead section lists the names of the methods used, but I still do not know anything about them. The lead section only uses information that it elaborates on later in the article, which is appropriate. The tone of this portion of the page is concise. but perhaps to a fault (see earlier suggestions). If I take a look at the Talk section of the page, I notice that at least one other user had the same opinion.

Some of the information in the article may be incorrect-- e.g. the date of development of the IR gas analyzer method. The most recent edits to the article were Jan of 2022. This may have been comments left by other users on the Talk page. The information present in the article may no longer be relevant if the technology has changed since then.

All content is relevant to the topic, but there is not enough of it. Only the most basic information-- name, date, function, etc.-- is given. There are grammatical errors throughout the article, but not so much that I am unable to understand it. I did not notice any spelling errors.

The author of this article does not take up any particular point-of-view; neutral word choice is used throughout.

The article is well cited. The number of sources actually cited in the references section, however, is surprisingly limited for the number in-text citations that were used. Most of the links were to other Wikipedia articles. This would suggest that perhaps the author selected sources which are not diverse and, as such, may offer only limited information. The links in the references do appear to work. There is one link to an Economist article-- this does not feel like a good source for the topic.

There s a single image in the article of four graphs that show the concentration of different GHGs during period from 1978 to 2010. This image feels very random because it depicts such an arbitrary period of time. It does give the viewer an idea of how the concentration of gases can be displayed on a graph as a function of time.

The talk page has a handful of comments (edit suggestions). It appears to have been written by a student. It is part of two WikiProjects: Environment and climate change (both are rated C-class).

Overall, I feel that this article has a good basis for a topic that can be further developed. With additional details provided by a broader range of sources, I think that the article would be improved greatly.