User:BaileyLin/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Carbon Cycle

All information presented in the article is relevant to the topic. There was nothing in the article that was distracting and everything appeared professional. The information is up to date and there does not appear to be anything missing. A possible improvement made could be the addition of figures in the "Climate change feedbacks" subsection. The information is presented clearly and accurately; however, there is some jargon present. The article links to other Wikipedia articles for related topics which may help explain the jargon to a person who is unfamiliar with the topic. The article is neutral and claims made do not appear heavily biased toward any particular position. As such, there are no viewpoints that are disproportionately under or overrepresented. The citations are from scientific articles published in reputable journals. The citation links are in working order, and the sources support the claims made in the article. Each fact is referenced with a scientific article published in a reputable journal. These sources are neutral.

Nitrogen Cycle

All information presented in the article is relevant to the topic. Some of the image formatting in the section on "Denitrification" was poorly done and was mildly distracting to look at. However, everything else in the article appeared professional. The information is up to date and nothing appears to be missing. A possible improvement made could be fixing the formatting of the images in the "Denitrification" subsection and the addition of more information to the "Dissimilatory nitrate reduction to ammonium" and "Other processes" sections. The information is presented clearly and accurately with some jargon present. The article links to other Wikipedia articles for related topics which may help explain the jargon to a person who is unfamiliar with the topic. The article is neutral and claims made do not appear heavily biased toward any particular position. There are no viewpoints that are disproportionately under or overrepresented. The citations are from scientific articles published in reputable journals. All citation links checked work, and the sources support the claims made in the article. Each fact is referenced with a scientific article published in a reputable journal, which are generally neutral sources.

Phosphorus Cycle

All information presented in the article is relevant to the topic. The sections on "Phosphorus cycling" and "Phosphatic minerals" are a bit text heavy, which some readers could potentially consider boring to look at or difficult to get through. The information is up to date and nothing appears to be missing. A possible improvement made could be the addition of images or figures to the text heavy sections on "Phosphorus cycling" and "Phosphatic minerals". Another possible improvement could be the addition of figures on human impact on the phosphorus cycle (maybe something involving how it has potentially changed over time?) in the "Human influences" section of the article. The information is presented clearly and accurately; however, there is some scientific jargon present. The article links to other Wikipedia articles for related topics which may help explain the jargon to a person who is unfamiliar with the topic. The article is neutral and claims made do not appear heavily biased toward any particular position. There are no viewpoints that are disproportionately under or overrepresented. The citations are from scientific articles published in reputable journals. Citation links for the sources checked are working, and the sources support the claims made in the article. Each fact is referenced with a scientific article published in a reputable journal, which are generally neutral sources.