User:ShawnInnocent99/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Environmental impact of mining

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen this article because it focuses on mining which is one of the many resource extraction methods and I feel like it relates to this course. My degree is Environmental science thus talking its environmental effects really combines the two important aspects of my interest. The article contents are up to date with information being relevant to the overall theme. Although, some sections like erosion could do with a little more information. Mountaintop removal mining has no summary at all and just a link to the actual article, maybe that section could have some information for people who just want a quick summary and do not want to visit more sites with heavier content load. The article doesn't deal with equity gaps or information on minority populations or topics. Due to the nature of the article, it has to talk about the impacts of mining on the environment and there are only negatives to this and no positives so even if in a way it comes biased against mining it really only projects an unbiased viewpoint on the negatives of mining. the article doesn't seem to have a bias against any positions. If you look at all the section it seems balanced overall, there may have been an attempt to include more information for its effect on biodiversity but it is such a broad topic that it is difficult to summarize into a section even smaller than what it already is. The article makes no attempt to sway ones viewpoint and remains completely neutral in whatever information it provides. However, not all facts are backed up with sources. There are sentences with some information on it without a reference which really should not be the case. Whatever sources are on there though reflect thoroughness and are mainly recent with the oldest source being taken from an article written in 1998. The sources include variety of individuals from different parts of the world indicating diversity and inclusiveness. There could have been more peer-reviewed articles used as sources for topic such as acid rock drainage, sinkholes but rest of the sections look like they've got good amount and quality sources. Although I didn't click them all, whatever links I clicked seem to be working fine. the article is concise and easy to read and it is grammatically accurate however, there are a few run-on sentences here and there which may need proper breakdown. Section breakdown also seems to be logical in relation to the topic. The article includes 6 images of which, all of them have captions albeit the last image only had its location specified in the caption. They all follow copyright regulation. Some images are too small on the screen for my liking and doesn't seem to grip the audience in an appropriate manner. There aren't too many conversations taking place, although a user did mark off a sentence as unclear back in 2016. This article is rated C-class on mining, energy and environment and top importance for mining. Overall this article is great in spending details on impacts of mining on the environment and being accurate. I like the variety of sections this article had to offer because not everyone reading this article would have a go to background knowledge on the different sections and then for the article to go in decent depth is refreshing as an up and coming environmentalist. What I would improve is that I would reference every statement made in the article so there is no room for doubt. The article is well-developed.

Evaluate the article
The lead section provides variety of detail and has a good introduction. It sets up the article in a way that is easy to follow if you aren't familiar with the main environmental issues with mining. It does not have a brief description of the major sections of the article however, to keep the article concise and easy-to-follow it does its job. It did not include details that weren't to be found later on in the paper.