User:Redhairrockstar/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: Groundwater remediation
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose Groundwater remediation because understanding the chemistry that goes behind it is what we have most recently been studying. A simple understanding of groundwater remediation chemistry could have saved so many people in Flint, Michigan.

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? No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Its very detailed, but I think its good to explain why these remediations exist.

Lead evaluation
The lead has a great introduction to the importance of groundwater remediation on a level easily introducible to people with no prior knowledge.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes
 * 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
I think I good point to add would be the topic of underrepresented populations when it comes to quality of water.

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 overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

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? No
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Some, not all.

Sources and references evaluation
Most of the references are from the Center of Public Environment Oversight with broken links.

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? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? n/a
 * Are images well-captioned? n/a
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? n/a
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? n/a

Images and media evaluation
No images.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? They would like more people to talk about the locations where groundwater remediations occur, I think this would play in with underrepresented populations.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? C-Class, Mid-Importance- Yes
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This talks more about the process that go into water remediations, in class we have only talked about the chemical process behind it. We have gone into the importance of it within communities and tied it back to modern day water quality issues.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It describes the processes very well and has a decent introduction of how water quality can become poor.
 * What are the article's strengths? the descriptions of all the different plans and technologies,
 * How can the article be improved? Images would be great and also assessing the underrepresented populations that do not get to benefit from these process.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say its underdeveloped. The information is there, but it needs more.

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: