User:RoyalEnglishBreakfast/Evaluate another Article

Which article are you evaluating?
California Climate Credit

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article to evaluate because I'm interested in law and politics, and the California Climate Credit lies at the intersection of law, politics, and sustainability and climate change. The California Climate Credit program places California as a leader in the global climate change arena, so information pertaining to this topic should be readily available to the general public. My first impression of this article is that it gives a brief overview of the program, but does not go in depth into any sections of the article. While there usually are subsections in Wikipedia articles, this article is not separated as such, and the lead section is not separate from the rest of the article.

Evaluate the article
This article has a concise lead paragraph that briefly and clearly introduces the topic. One change I might like to make is restructuring the article to keep the lead section separate from the rest of the article and set up subsections.

The article is well-written with no spelling or grammatical errors that I noticed. The content is clear and balanced in that it covers each paragraph equally. The information is relevant and appears up to date, exemplified by the paragraph that covers the extension of the program to 2030 and the last paragraph which discusses COVID-19. This article has a non-biased tone and does not seem to be persuading the reader to believe a certain viewpoint. One minority "opinion" that is excluded is the public utilities' reaction to this program, but since this article is not very developed, it does not seem intentional to leave this out.

Though each paragraph is equally represented, they are all lacking in detail and need more sources to support the information. Right now there are four references on this article, and the first link (to the California government website) does not work. The remaining references are from news sources which are relatively up to date (from 2015, 2017, and 2020). After some very brief research, there are some peer reviewed articles available that discuss the economics and political viability of cap-and-trade programs and carbon taxes that look like viable sources to supplement this article. It's key that the tone of this article remains neutral, especially given that sources can be biased when it comes to politics. There are no images in this article, so that is something to improve.

The talk page has no conversations from other users as of the evening of February 11. This article is rated as Stub-class and is part of three other WikiProjects: WikiProject California, WikiProject Climate change, and WikiProject Environment.

My overall impression of this article is that it has a solid foundation, but users just need to continue expanding upon this foundation using good sources. From the beginning, this article is neutral and sets a good precedent for future editors to follow suit. Some areas of improvement, as mentioned earlier, would be the structure of the article--to better organize the ideas, add subsections--and the content needs more details from better peer reviewed sources. Right now, this article is underdeveloped but not poorly written.