User:MatthieuFoucu/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

This is for a class at Purdue, and I just watched Oppenheimer

Evaluate the article

Lead section:

The lead sections introductory sentence, "A nuclear weapon is an explosive device that derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions, either fission (fission bomb) or a combination of fission and fusion reactions (thermonuclear bomb), producing a nuclear explosion." provides a brief overview of the definition of the bomb. Though I would say that the majority of the article is not only about how the bomb is made. It talks about the ways it was transported and the government policies with it.

Yes the lead includes a brief description of some of the major sections in a concise format.

Content:

All the content is relevant and up to date. There is no content that is missing, and yes it addresses topics related to historically underrepresented populations talking about all the countries that have weapons and the government policies.

Tone and balance:

The article is very neutral there are no clear biases. Unless someone is very offended when they mention how Japan was effected. One of the possible places for bias is in the government and policies section, though "Because they are weapons of mass destruction, the proliferation and possible use of nuclear weapons are important issues in international relations and diplomacy." this quote shows how neutral they are. But these authors seem to have written a lot about the negative effects on the bomb. There is almost as much written about the negative effects as the base history and use about the bomb, so that could seem bias.

Sources and references:

All sources are backed up with papers and other trustworthy and reliable references. All the links seem to work. But in my opinion there should be more sources and citations. For example they could link "nuclear fission reactions" to another page and not assume the reader knows fusion reactions but not fission reactions.

Organization and writing quality:

The article is very organized written with very few grammar mistakes and it is very easy to follow and read. The topics are not bouncing around they are all connected and ordered in a smart way.

Images and media:

There are lots of useful images being used that all enhance the information. Such as the one showing the size of the bomb that was tested at Manhattan with Robert j Oppenheimer. All images follow the copyright rules of this page. And none of them are disrupting the flow of reading this article so they are all in positions that don't disrupt the paper.

Overall:

Overall this is a really well written article with maybe a few subjective minor details to fix such as more citations and less bias in the amount written about the positives and negatives. I would say this is a really well developed article.