User:Spacewanderer7/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: Human impact on the nitrogen cycle
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Humans are having such an impact on the environment that the period of time we're in has been named "Anthropocene". An article describing human impact on a cycle as important as the nitrogen cycle is definitely pertinent to current climate problems.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead feels somewhat repetitive in this article. The first three sentences seem to repeat the same idea: the nitrogen cycle is diverse and humans impact it.The lead does include a description of the article's major sections. The lead is concise and not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The content in the article is relevant to the topic and up to date. The content is complete as well. It does not address any of wikipedia's equity gaps.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral and not biased. The article does attempt to persuade the reader in favor of the idea that humans are impacting the environment -- which is factual and only a persuasion given today's political climate.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The sources cited in the article are reliable and representative of available literature. They are also current and the links available work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is a bit heavy on technical scientific jargon. I'm probably able to digest it better than the average person because I have a scientific background. It does not have any grammatical or spelling errors that I noticed. The article is well-organized when it comes to how everything is separated; however, it feels like everything was placed under one subheading when that wasn't necessarily the best way to separate things.

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?

Images and media evaluation
There is only one image and a few tables. The image opens the article with a graphic of the nitrogen cycle and the tables elucidate data mentioned in the article. They are helpful to the article.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The article is part of the WikiProject Soil and is rated as Start Class and Mid importance. The talk page isn't very populated -- it seems there's been a lull in work on this article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
The article needs work to remove jargon and become more readable to the average person. It has strengths in that it details all parts of the nitrogen cycle. The article is moderately developed and could use some work in fixing the formatting so each topic is more differentiated.

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: