User:Sarzie99/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Marine conservation

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article by looking through WikiProject topics and and finding the Ecology WikiProject. I then looked through the article assessment table, specifically looking for articles that were of high importance but C-class quality. The marine conservation article stood out to me because I'm interested in the field of conservation and I don't have a lot of knowledge about marine conservation specifically, so I saw it as a good opportunity to learn something. This article matters because the majority of the earth is made up up the ocean and therefore its conservation of the utmost importance. Climate change is also having extreme negative impacts on the ocean, so conservation is becoming increasingly important as climate change accelerates. My preliminary impression of the article is that it looks very thorough and well-researched, but some of the sub-sections are a little short.

Evaluate the article
The lead section is very well written. It gives a thorough but concise introductory description of the subject. I doesn't include a section about all of the articles major topics, but I think that was a good choice because if it was included, the lead section would be overwhelming. I like that they used many links to other articles for people who are interested in related topics, such as species loss and conservation biology. Content-wise, everything that is included is relevant to the field of marine conservation and is up-to-date. One thing I think it could have gone into less detail about was coral reefs. While coral reefs are a very important aspect of marine ecosystems and must be conserved, a separate, very detailed article about coral reefs already exists. I think a brief mention along with a link to the main coral reef article would have sufficed. A section that could have used more information was the "Laws and treaties" section. They named a few laws that are related to marine conservation, but didn't give information about what each law did. While each law does have its own associated article, a brief one-sentence description of each law would have been helpful. The tone of the article was neutral and did not appear biased toward any particular position. It was certainly advocating for the importance of marine conservation, but it did so by presenting facts. This article used a large amount of sources compared to its length, most of which are current. There are some articles from the 1990s and early 2000s, which may be considered unreliable. However, I am unsure of how much these topics change over the years, so the information presented from them may still be accurate. Almost every source listed in the references section included a link to the source, which is very helpful when trying to find more information about a topic or fact-check a claim. The article is very well organized and well-written. It follows a logical structure and the sub-sections are a good break-down of the major topic. I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors. The images that are included have descriptive captions and follow copyright guidelines. I think that more images would be helpful, especially in the Techniques and Technology sections to show the different equipment that is used. Overall, I think this article is well-developed, but could use a few minor changes as I outlined previously.