User:Zalof33/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (link)
 * Environmental science
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Environmental Science is a field that interests me, being a Biology major.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the introductory sentence discusses what fields of study are incorporated in environmental science and what this field of science is focused on.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, it discusses all of the fields of study involved in environmental science and some of them are listed as major sections in the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, some of the fields of study listed are not present in the article, but are linked in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise, listing a brief history of environmental science and some issues that environmental science is working on.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, all of the content is relevant.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, this page was edited very recently as well.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes, I think that this page could have discussed more about other fields of study that are incorporated in working with environmental science.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No, this article addresses topics that effect the planet, such as pollution and climate change.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article is neutral. It does not appear to contain any biases.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, I believe this article has uniform explanations for each field of study listed in the article.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, there is no persuasion present in this article.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No, but those that aren't cited are labelled as "citation needed".
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, but there are more sources needed to address all the facts claimed in the article.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, the sources are current; some are even from this year.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes, some are researchers and organizations associated with the topic.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links are working.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it is easy to read and understand.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There were not any apparent spelling or grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, but I feel that the article should include more fields of study focused on issues associated with environmental science.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes there are a few images present in the article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes all images contain a brief description of the image below.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, I believe so.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are conversations of suggestions on what to add to this article and where citations are needed.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated as C-class, needing more information on the topic. It appears to just be ran by volunteers.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's status appears to be a work-in-progress article.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * This article gives great information on the fields of study associated with environmental science.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * There needs to be more information about other fields of study that are discussed in the Lead, but not in the article itself.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: