User:Sofiahsantamaria/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Greenpoint oil spill
 * I chose this article to evaluate because oil spills are extremely harmful to any organism that lives near or around the affected body of water.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it describes the event and the great impact it held to the US.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, it gives a synopsis of what, when, and where the event happened.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, the lead contained the major topics that were later explained in further detail throughout the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is extremely concise and only gives you the main points of the event that occurred.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, it provides the history of what caused the event, how people found out about it, and the aftermath.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The page was last edited on June 20, 2019.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Everything seems to be under the proper sections, all the data seems relevant and informative in regards to the Greenpoint oil spill.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, it's extremely factual.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? It is equally represented amongst all organizations involved.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The article simply states the facts of the event.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, it was cited by multiple reliable sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? They were all related to the oil spill and the parties involved with it.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The ones that I clicked on took me to the exact topic.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Very concise, did not take more than 5 minutes to read and understand.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Everything seems to be in-check.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, it was written chronologically.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? It shows a map of the area and where the oil spill occurred.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It has been rated as start class and low importance. The article was apart of WikiProject New York City.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Informative, useful, gives a tight synopsis of the event.
 * What are the article's strengths? Factual, strong and informative lead.
 * How can the article be improved? The "Cleanup efforts and seepage mitigation" section could be cleaned up and made less messy. The ending got a bit confusing for me because many different organizations were being cited in regards to the oil vapor intrusion.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Very well developed.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: Talk:Greenpoint oil spill