User:Suchem1403/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Air pollution in India

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because taking care of the environment is one of my biggest interests. As such, learning about pollution in certain areas of the world will help me develop a better idea of what are the factors contributing to the declining health of our planet and how to prevent any future environmental damage from being done. My first impression of this article is that it was organized very well with specific sections dedicated to the causes, effects, and steps taken to address the air pollution issue in India. All the information provided was informative and easy to understand and was presented from reliable sources.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:


 * The lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic.
 * The lead includes a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * The lead does not contain information that's not present in the article.
 * The lead is concise with no unnecessary or extra details.

Content:


 * The article's content is relevant to the article topic.
 * The content seems to be pretty up-to-date.
 * There is no missing content or content that does not belong.
 * The article does deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps as it discusses India which is an underrepresented population and the issue of environmental health which is a topic not emphasized much in the grand scheme of news today.

Tone and Balance:


 * The article is neutral.
 * For the most part, there are no claims that seem heavily biased towards a particular position. However the section titled "fuel and biomass burning isn't necessary" could be deemed biased, as this wording seems like this is the position that was taken in the article.
 * All viewpoints are equally represented.
 * No minority or fringe viewpoints were addressed.
 * Aside from the "fuel and biomass burning isn't necessary" section previously mentioned, the rest of the article doesn't seem to persuade readers in favor of any one position.

Sources and References:


 * All facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.
 * The sources reflect the available literature on the topic.
 * A majority of the sources are from the past 3 years, although there's a couple that are from the early 2000's.
 * The sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors.
 * There don't seem to be sources better than the ones provided, although there are some of the same par (such as other peer-reviewed articles).
 * The links to the sources work.

Organization and Writing Quality:


 * The article is clear, concise, and easy to understand.
 * The article doesn't seem to have any spelling or grammatical errors.
 * The article is well-organized into sections that reflect the logical flow of information pertaining to this topic (ie. causes, effects, steps taken)

Images and Media:


 * The article includes images that enhance understanding of the topic.
 * All images are well captioned.
 * All images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * All the images are laid out in a visually appealing way except for the table labeled "Top 13 Cities in India with the highest level of PM 2.5". It should be centered or fixed to the right of the page like all the other images.

Talk Page Discussion:


 * The conversations on the article's talk page address vandalism on the article that needed cleanup and external links that needed modifications.
 * The article is within the scope of WikiProject India and had been rated C-Class
 * Wikipedia discusses this topic in much more detail and with much more supporting data than normally discussed in classes.

Overall Impressions:


 * The article is overall up-to-date and still being revised with the most recent edit made in November 19, 2021.
 * The article's strengths include the way it has been organized, the language is accurate and easy to understand, and the content contains supporting evidence that is backed by reliable sources.
 * Some things that could be improved are the section title for "fuel and biomass burning isn't necessary", which could be changed to something more neutral like simply "fuel and biomass burning", and the positioning of the image titled "Top 13 Cities in India with the highest level of PM 2.5".
 * I would consider this article completed and well-developed.