User:Tahseenchowdhury1/sandbox1

THIS IS THE TEMP SANDBOX

Article Evaluation
100,000-year problem

Evaluating Content


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * The article is relevant to the article topic, however there are a variety of obvious issues with the article. For one, the article title fails to clearly explain what the issue is. It is very ambiguous. Furthermore, the initial paragraph fails to accurately explain the problem itself. The beginning of the article fails to clearly explain the background of the problem. There isn't anything too distracting.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * The information does not seem to be out of date, and most of the data seems like it has been cited well. There doesn't seem to be anything that is missing in the article.
 * What else could be improved?
 * Aside from the title being improved, the article seems fine.

Renewable Energy in California - Article Evaluation
Evaluating Content


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Are some areas under- or over-developed?
 * The article does not exist.
 * Is it written neutrally?
 * The article does not exist.
 * Does each claim have a citation? Are the citations reliable?
 * The article does not exist.