User:Rishele Settle/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Spring bloom

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I personally am very interested in the spring bloom, specifically the driving forces and mechanisms behind it. This matters because not only is the bloom important for the ecosystem in this location, but also is a good example of how variable the oceans are in related to physical, biological and chemical aspects. My preliminary impression of the wiki page was good. I noted there was photos and subsections as well as a decent amount of citations. This was a good brief indicator of a well put together wiki page.

Evaluate the article
Content:


 * The introduction paragraph was set up and described according to the topic. It provided the definition of the spring bloom, when it occurs, and follows with points that set up the next subsections. The introduction is not overly detailed, yet provides enough information (ex. describing the abiotic and biotic factors, while not going into detail), to further describe them in future sub topics.
 * Under the subtopic "Classic Mechanisms", I think the content related to the abiotic factors (wind turbulence, stratification etc.) that are explained are done wele and concisely. In terms of the biotic factors, nutrients and their importance in terms of the bloom and phytoplankton growth was explained well, but I think the relevance of nutrient limitation (N and P) could have been more specific to the spring bloom itself. Instead, it was just talked about on its own as limiting, whereas it would be beneficial to relate it directly back to the spring bloom (ex, therefore by means of P or N or Fe limitation, the spring bloom ...).
 * I do think light should be more addressed in this case because blooms and phytoplankton growth ae very dependent on light. Photosynthesis cannot occur without light, or under certain light regines and therefore limits growth. This was talked about slightly, but having a more emphasis on light would strengthen the content.
 * I think the species succession was very well written as well as important to the topic of the spring bloom. I think a very important aspect of the the spring bloom with respect to the species succession is the paradox of the phytoplankton. Having mentioned this to the spring bloom would be beneficial.
 * The topic on variability and the influence of climate change is important, but I think the importance and/or significance of these changes (such as the changes in timing, changes in species abundance) should be in moe detail. Explaining why these changes due to global warming are important (ex. The significance of these changes are important for food web/trophic changes, changes in abundance/species).

Tone:


 * The tone of this article is very neutral. There is no persuasiveness occuring, nor does the writer seem to be attempting to favor a certain position. What is written consists of facts and well known characteristics and subtopics of the topic 'Spring Bloom".
 * I think one viewpoint that could be underrepresented is the importance of climate change. I believe it should be talked about more (or even just the significance).

Sources and References:


 * When checking a few references, the links did work. The source supports the claim in this article (Checking reference 9, the paraphrasing is well written).
 * The references seem to be reliable sources, all from scholarly articles/books. The sources are current, yet some sources are from 1950's, which is acceptable in this wiki page because Sverdrups hypothesis (which was talked about), is from 1959.
 * References and sources are good. I do feel as though there could be a bit more sources or literature research considering the age and the fieldwork done around the topic of "Spring Bloom".

Images and Media:


 * I think there is not enough images within this page. The spring bloom can be a very difficult thing to explain to a reader with not much background but visual aid can be very supportive in the mechanisms (hypothesized mechanisms) underlying the Spring Bloom. Therefore I believe more images (diagrams) can be used to reference when discussing the mechanisms.
 * The labelling and the description of the photos/images are well described.
 * I do think the rearrangement of photos would make this page seem more appealing. They are stacked over one another, and not distributed (only 2 images) evenly.
 * The images do adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

Organization and Writing Quality:


 * The page is well-written in that it is concise and clear, although I do think the flow of the paper could be improved. There is a jump from the mechanisms to "Northward Progression" in which threw me off slightly with the transition.
 * There are a few grammatical errors, but very insignificant ones "For example, several studies have reported a correlation between earlier spring bloom onset and temperature increases over time", instead "For example, several studies have reported a correlation between earlier spring bloom onset and increasing temperature over time". But no spelling errors.
 * The topic is broken down into good subtopics, although the position of the topics can be rearranged.

Talk Page Discussion:


 * This was part of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
 * There are no other discussions going on about this page.
 * The content is related to the content taught in class.

Overall Impressions:


 * The article was well written overall.
 * The strengths are the information that was included was good, clear and concise. As well as the information was appropriate in terms of the topic and was from reliable sources.
 * I think what could be improved would be the amount of images and images used. I think there could have been a better usage of images in terms of helping further the readers understanding.
 * I also think that the significance of climate change on the spring bloom should be highlighted as there are many extreme effects of this.
 * Overall, I would say this article is under-developed but only slightly.