User:SnowN1/Evaluate an Article


 * 1) There's missing information in regards to how the cadmium spread in the ecosystem- it merely says that it moved, but doesn't describe the processes or how it affected the rice/fish/ other organisms. It's also very sparse on what exactly the cadmium poising does, and how it affects animals.
 * 2) It seems to be a neutral article, the only issue is the potential of an environmental injustice in regards to the populations impacted by the cadmium. I'm not sure if it disproportionally  affected those of lower economic or racial makeup, that may be something that could change what needs to be included in terms of the population impacted.
 * 3) The citations aren't great - 2/6 listed references lead to a "page not found", 2/6 are to very short, old webpages that aren't as reliable as they could be, and the final 2 are good sources from journals with lots of information and citations. In the page itself, there are several sentences that have listed claims with a "citation needed" flag. It isn't necessarily taking information from a wide variety of sources, although that may be due to a lack of writings on the subject.
 * 4) The article is part of the Project Japan and Project Medicine. It's rated as a low importance, C class for the project Japan, and a Start class level article for project medicine.There's also a few conversations on how best to represent the information in the article, and if the sections are necessarily organized in the right way.