User:Student1254/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Evaluating content: Not everything in the article is relevant to my article topic that is Acrotelm. However, most of the informations are relevant, and there are informations not directly relevant to it, but provides better understanding of Acrotelm. There was not much thing distracted me, but I hope there were more visual examples to explain certain subjects. It is always easier to understand science with visualization. Most of the information provided was out of date. More than half of the information was referenced from 1990s, and I barely saw references over 2010. Scientific informations are presented clearly, an accurately. However, they could provide more direct informations or explanations to describe Acrotlem to help audience better understand what clearly is Acrotelm. This article is not linked to other Wikipedia articles for related topics.

Evaluating tone: The article is basically introducing about the peat lands, so the tone is very neutral, and not biased. However, the article provides numerous experiments and in-text citations to provide evidence.

Evaluating sources: The article is a textbook with full of references. I checked few citations, and the links are good enough to work. They used several references from EPA(United States Environmental Protection Agency), Ecological monograph journals in the GT library, and some experimental journals.

Evaluating Talk Page: I added the first entry on the talk page.