User:Yanakigel1/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Natural building

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am an Architecture student and want to focus my thesis on Natural building materials/Biomimicry. When looking through articles I have stumbled upon Natural building which I found surprisingly short.

Evaluate the article
Lead section:

Explains the contents clearly. I don't think there are any issues with it.

Content:

I feel like the article could be further explored since it is listing the most primary structure systems even though in recent years there has been a large development going in this field.

Tone and Balance:

The article talks about architecture using natural material; a topic that could be seen very neutral in itself. It does not try to create any specific view points or positions.

Sources and references:

I tried out the links and they all work. For the amount of written text in the article I would say there is a good quantity of notes but perhaps it could have more than four references. In addition the sources are not too diverse, similarly to the topic new ones could be added. With the topic touching on building methods from around the world there are not many "non American" texts in it. But as mentioned before, it is short so it doesn't require as much.

Organization and writing quality:

Is it well organized and is clear. There were a few small grammatical mistakes but I edited them.

Images and Media:

The images are chosen very well and don't have any issues with them. More could be added to some of the "Techniques" section. But other than that they are good.

Talk page discussion:

This article is part of the WikiProject Environment, is ranked B, and has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

There are lots of discussions, some talking on adding an "impact" area, but i find that it might become a problem in "tone and balance" part. Many of the others agree that this article needs more to it and the information in it is currently limited. There is also a suggestion in merging it with "Green building" since they overlap quite a bit but as an architecture student I think there are major differences and those topics should be viewed as separate(the "impact" could be added to green building article instead). We haven't discussed much of the architectural topic in class but the part of the comments in "Talk", they are really in depth, more than what I have expected.

Overall Impression:

I think it is a well written article but there could be much more added to it. It is a very large topic and could have more examples and varieties. The comment about the merging with green building article suggest adding some text on how the two differ to not confuse the reader that they might talk of the same thing.