User:Ureegedeg/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Hydrocharis morsus-ranae

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
Why you chose it: I chose it because it was categorized as a stub article, and many scientific research projects had been done for this species in depth. So, I thought it would be great to expand this article using the scientific papers available.

Why it matters: This small species causes environmental problems as it is invasive in North America and Canada. Also, there are some benefits for aquatic ecosystems. So I wanted to balance this information on Wikipedia, where the public can find easier.

What your preliminary impression of it was: The original article lacked sources that can backup the information stated. It only had 2 sources of which one is blog on internet and other invalid link. Although, the pictures were great.

Evaluate the article
Everything in the article is related to the topic and nothing disrupts while reading. It lacks details information about the topic, however contents are not out of date. Equity gap is not applicable for this topic. Expansion and additions of detail for this article are needed. Article is neutral, however, it did not include potential benefits that this species offer for environment. Thus, I would say this article underrepresented the species. Only two sources were available, one doesn't work and other is not reliable. Since there is no reliance on the citations, article is not being supported. It is hard to evaluate the bias and author of the sources based on its fewness and unreliableness.