User:Tbalaj01/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Environmental science)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article to review because given the nature of this Wiki page and how broad it is in addressing topics, there is likely a lot of feedback that can be given to improve the page. Additionally, it matters because it describes a broad discipline within science, and therefore, there is always more information to add, especially with new advances in science. Initially, when reading it, I found that there is a lot the page could have improved on, especially in the introduction section. I also found it confusing at first as I felt that it hops around subtopics easily.

Evaluate the article
The Lead section: It did a subpar job of introducing the topic of Environmental Sciences. The first sentence of the article describes environmental sciences well and captures the big picture. However, throughout the lead section, it feels as though the page jumps around at various subtopics/disciplines within environmental sciences and does not care to elaborate and describe their larger application within the academic field. Additionally, the introduction and mention of the historical background could have been better integrated and described by mentioning how current environmental sciences has changed since the birth of the field in the 1960s and/or 1970s.

Content: In terms of content, there is a lot to improve on. In the subsection of this wikipage, it mentions ecology, geophysics, and atmospheric sciences, however, these were not described more in the lead section. Additionally, in the lead section, the writer mentions various academic fields that are integrated, however, does not include and elaborate on most of the fields mentioned. Additionally, the section describing "Regulations driving the studies" does not seem that relevant to this page and is not mentioned in the lead section.

Tone and Balance: In terms of remaining neutral and non-bias, the writer does a good job of writing the content without being subjective. There is no sense of personal judgement in the content.

Sources and References: The writer does a great job naturally integrating sources and references within the content. Additionally, the writer does a great job of citing reputable sources and sources that are open to public use such as government websites/documents and academically published materials. The citation styles are also consistent and the links work for the sources that I chose to check.

Organization and Writing Quality: The writer did a sufficient job of organizing the wikipage, but this page could be improved significantly. Firstly, there are several grammar corrections that should be made, especially in terms of placing commas and/or run-on sentences. Secondly, the page is not organized that well. It jumps around to different sub-topics without a clear headline/title of what will be discussed and also does not discuss most subtopics that are mentioned in the lead section. This wikipage could have been made to include more subtopics/table of content material.

Images: The images appear to be cited and referenced properly, and all images appear to be used freely by the public. However, the images chosen could have been more broadly focused to encompass more of the subtopics within environmental sciences.

Talk Page: The Talk Page has several resources/sub-links available for further assistance, but it does not appear to contain ongoing-discussions about the page nor does it seem to be a page that was created for a school project.

Overall Impressions: Overall, the tone, references, and media materials of the page was sufficient, however, the content can be improved on. It may be useful to add more information to the page regarding broader scopes of environmental sciences and add more subcategories about disciplines within Environmental Sciences. Additionally, it will be worth it to add subcategories about the history and the future of environmental sciences as its own section to make it more descriptive and organized.

~Tanya