User:RLW016/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: Environmental geology
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
Because I enjoy Environmental Geology and it was one of my favorite classes that I had ever taken in college.

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? It describes the topics main sections but not in the article.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise for the topic and explanation.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? The little content that is available is relevant.
Is the content up-to-date? Yes
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Missing content yes.
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Is the article neutral? Yes
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No the link does not lead to the information.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? No.
Are the sources current? No it doesn't work
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No and they do not include the history of the topic or the individuals who adapted this science.
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 the major points of the topic? No. The introduction was started on the topic but has gone no further than that. The topic has a history and a beginning that could be described here.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? About how the page lacks to someone suggesting more information like fracking.
How is the article rated? Mid importance
Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes part of the WikiProject Environment
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Humm...Maybe I went a little off topic. I didn't exactly know I should choice a Freshwater article I just choose one.

What is the article's overall status? Stub-class and Mid-importance
What are the article's strengths? That it introduces Environmental Geology as a topic
How can the article be improved? It needs more information. Tons more of information.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Poorly developed

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 — ~~~~