This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
The Lead gives a very short overview of Operation Teapot and states that the information within the article is a summary table. There is no discussion of the article's major sections nor information that is listed later. Therefore, this Lead is very poorly detailed.
The content is only a summary table and within it, it does not give any real description of the tests. The article was last edited on November 15, 2019 with no substantial additions. The content is missing the general descriptions of the tests and information taken from the tests. In particular, Operation Cue, does have a small paragraph of information at the bottom of the article, but it is very generic with no full discussion of the test or why they were testing.
The article has a neutral tone in the content. There is not position made in the article because there is not enough information to form an opinion. For some of these tests, the public and official opinion is underrepresented as there is not discussion of the consequences or gains from the tests. The article does not persuade anyone.
The facts in the article are mostly not backed by secondary sources. The chart's notes are simply statements with no source material. At the bottom with the references, there are source links to a few secondary sources that do work. However, there are multiple references that link directly to primary sources.
The small paragraphs are written well enough to voice a generic point on the tests. I do not see any spelling errors, but a few grammatical errors are present. The article is not well-organized. The massive chart a the top of the page eclipses the little information towards the end and is distracting since it does not contain much information.
This article contains one photograph and one video clip. They are not well captioned and do not enhance any understanding of the topic. They are not laid out in a particular way as they sit on opposite ends of the article. The photo is simply a mushroom cloud and the clip is from Operation Cue.
The conversations discuss the fact that the chart on the page in generated by another website run by an editor. Also they discuss adjusting the information on the nuclear tests but do not discuss the best representations. There does not seem to be enough information to talk about the representation. It is rated "Start-Class" with "Mid-importance". It is a part of the Wiki project Nevada. This topic is covered only in basic detail on Wikipedia while in class we would discuss the success/failures, political problems, and environmental impact.
Overall, this article is severely lacking in information. The chart is poorly generated and too large to be convenient in research. The strength of the article is that it provides a decent overview for the amount of tests. It can be improved by adding additional information about the individual tests. There are several books about nuclear tests and the Federal Civil Defense Administration did publish booklets to explain the tests. The addition of more contextual information and a wider variety of tests would help understand Operation Teapot. This article is not well-developed and is very incomplete. The chart alone lists 14 tests but only 4 receive some type of information.
with four tildes — ~~~~
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
The Lead gives a very short overview of Operation Teapot and states that the information within the article is a summary table. There is no discussion of the article's major sections nor information that is listed later. Therefore, this Lead is very poorly detailed.
The content is only a summary table and within it, it does not give any real description of the tests. The article was last edited on November 15, 2019 with no substantial additions. The content is missing the general descriptions of the tests and information taken from the tests. In particular, Operation Cue, does have a small paragraph of information at the bottom of the article, but it is very generic with no full discussion of the test or why they were testing.
The article has a neutral tone in the content. There is not position made in the article because there is not enough information to form an opinion. For some of these tests, the public and official opinion is underrepresented as there is not discussion of the consequences or gains from the tests. The article does not persuade anyone.
The facts in the article are mostly not backed by secondary sources. The chart's notes are simply statements with no source material. At the bottom with the references, there are source links to a few secondary sources that do work. However, there are multiple references that link directly to primary sources.
The small paragraphs are written well enough to voice a generic point on the tests. I do not see any spelling errors, but a few grammatical errors are present. The article is not well-organized. The massive chart a the top of the page eclipses the little information towards the end and is distracting since it does not contain much information.
This article contains one photograph and one video clip. They are not well captioned and do not enhance any understanding of the topic. They are not laid out in a particular way as they sit on opposite ends of the article. The photo is simply a mushroom cloud and the clip is from Operation Cue.
The conversations discuss the fact that the chart on the page in generated by another website run by an editor. Also they discuss adjusting the information on the nuclear tests but do not discuss the best representations. There does not seem to be enough information to talk about the representation. It is rated "Start-Class" with "Mid-importance". It is a part of the Wiki project Nevada. This topic is covered only in basic detail on Wikipedia while in class we would discuss the success/failures, political problems, and environmental impact.
Overall, this article is severely lacking in information. The chart is poorly generated and too large to be convenient in research. The strength of the article is that it provides a decent overview for the amount of tests. It can be improved by adding additional information about the individual tests. There are several books about nuclear tests and the Federal Civil Defense Administration did publish booklets to explain the tests. The addition of more contextual information and a wider variety of tests would help understand Operation Teapot. This article is not well-developed and is very incomplete. The chart alone lists 14 tests but only 4 receive some type of information.
with four tildes — ~~~~