User talk:Odunn23

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes

Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes

Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't). No

Is the lead concise or overly detailed? Overly detailed.

Is the article's content up-to-date? Yes

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No

Does the article deal with one of the Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Is the article from a neutral point of view? Yes

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No

Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? Yes

Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Are all the facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes

Are the sources current? Yes

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes

Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? No

Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Is the article well written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes

Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No

Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect major points of the topic? Yes

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes

Are images well-captioned? Yes

Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes

Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? One conversation going on is how to balance the use of single-use plastics during COVID-19, considering it is a sanitary way to distribute food/medical supplies/etc., yet still very harmful to the environment.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is a very broad topic and most likely used by many scholars in research/projects/etc.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Wikipedia focuses on both viewpoints in the pros/cons of plastic whereas in class we focused on the cons.

What is the article's overall status? It's reliable and up to date.

What are the article's strengths? It's neutral and detailed.

How can the article be improved? It could use some further organization.

How would you asses the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It's well-developed.

I evaluated the article.

Odunn23 (talk) 18:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)Odunn23

Thank you
Thank you for your constructive suggestions. Cward18vu (talk) 17:03, 22 October 2021 (UTC)