User:Swhit95/sandbox

Notes:

Climate change seems like a very neutrally written article. It has many sub-topics that have their own lengthy articles as well. The references are mostly primary research with several secondary articles as well. The few citations I checked had working links. Each sub-topic uses at least one reference to primary literature, often with figures or graphs linked in the article. The referenced literature seems to be neutral, unless you are one of those people that say all climate science is biased because they just want to create controversy and preserve their own jobs (I am not one of those people). The "infrastructure" paragraph under the "Observed and expected effects on social systems" heading is a stub, and doesn't link to an outside article that represents it more completely. I would say the article gives equal credence to all perspectives of the topic, including anthropogenic and other types of climate change. I assume it is a semi-protected page because of its political connotations -- people may want to vandalize the page to delegitimatize it or falsify information.

On the talk page, there are several discussions mostly initiated by people trying to delegitimatize the article, such as disputing the neutrality (trying to legitimatize climate change denial) or arguing that the primary literature referenced is biased, falsified, or misleading. Apparently the article was a featured article awhile ago (so it is generally considered "complete"), so there isn't much discussion about the actual architecture of the page.