User:Tjpratt24/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Talk:100% renewable energy

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Renewable Energy is becoming more and more important every day. Businesses are trying to adapt to using renewable energy to reduce their impacts on earth and climate change as climate change has been getting worse and worse every year. I find it really interesting what types of sectors can use 100% renewable energy and still operate at full capacity, and how it will help climate change. Also it mentions how its possible to maintain our current lifestyle under renewable energy. Many may think major shifts in lifestyle will occur if we move to 100% renewable energy but that is not always the case. My first impression of this article was that it seems to mention a lot of other scientist and sources to generate this article. It is very information heavy.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of the article does describe the topic and a brief description of the article, however it is very long. It is brief but long and might be better if it was more concise and adding more detail to the body. The articles content is relevant all the the article, as well as up to date. The article mentions findings from 2021 which means it's constantly being updated. It introduces topics that always relate back to renewable energy. The article is neutral with no heavily bias views. You might be able to could consider the personal opinions of shifting towards renewable energy or not renewable energy to be a bias but I think those are more personal opinion based. The article is clear and professional, and references all sources meaning no plagiarism was used. There are mentions from a bunch of different scientist, as well as historical references when needed. There are great images displayed throughout the article with descriptions under them, as well as a large data table that shows places with near 100% renewable energy. The talk page for this article is very aggressive. Much of it is just pointing out inconsistency within the article which is good but constructive criticism or edits would be helpful. Overall, I think the article is good. It is super detail heavy so sometimes it's a lot of information to handle. A suggestion I do have is to maybe clarify some aspects of the article as the sentences are run on and its easy to get lost, but otherwise I do like the article.