User:Sakura727/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.

Sustainable Sanitation (Sustainable sanitation)
I chose this article because this is what my group had decided on. The reason for my particular interest is because I would like to know how I can make an impact environmentally when it comes to my choices related to sanitation.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes, the lead provides a definition and explanation about what Sustainable Sanitation is going to be.

Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- I think this is lacking and additional information could be added
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- The Lead is very concise but may require further details.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes
Is the content up-to-date?
- No, it could be more up-to-date because the most recent source is from five years ago and the oldest source is from twenty years ago
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- I am not sure what exactly needs to be added but under "Sustainability Criteria" more information and sources are needed
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
- It covers a few types of ways of disposing waste but I do not know if is representing underrepresented populations.

Is the article neutral?
- There are some points where it is not neutral
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- yes, under "planning for sanitation" the first paragraph seems more opinionated than fact driven
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Under "examples" there is only the technology perspective
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- Yes, towards specific improvements in "Examples" section

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- no, under "sustainability criteria" there are no sources referenced other then other wikipedia articles which is not available
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- No, some sources come from similar websites
Are the sources current?
- No, it could be more up-to-date because the most recent source is from five years ago and the oldest source is from twenty years ago
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- No, some sources have the same authors contributing
Check a few links. Do they work?
- yes

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- It is alright
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Some
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Three images that reflect the passage in different ways but need more
Are images well-captioned?
- Yes
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- two photos have no references
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- no, they are off to the side and very tiny also one is very blurry

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- One person has made few comments about their edits for clarity and to get rid of unnecessary information
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- Under wikiprojects sanitation is is c-class, high importance
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- They try to stay more neutral but our papers have been more argumentative

What is the article's overall status?
- c-class
What are the article's strengths?
- Has good overview and summarry
How can the article be improved?
- With more recent information and sources
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- Under-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 — ~~~~