Talk:Sugary drink tax

Well written article with slight flaws Mirzal Bachmid (talk) 04:09, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

This was a really well written article with a lot of articles from neutral sources being used such as the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition and the World Health Organization. It also incorporated a section that talked about the tax that is applied around the world, further elaborating on its effectiveness and longevity, which helped add depth to the Wikipedia article. Whilst it did use articles that were neutral like academic literatures, it did use news articles, which have a tendency to be slightly biased, such as CNN and BBC. The article also did not have any grammatical inconsistencies and it also used the appropriate language that reinforces the author's neutrality. To encapsulate, the Wikipedia article deserved a B rating because it demonstrated depth, talking about a range of topics including the reason the tax was implemented in the the harm of excess sugar and the against the tax, a certain degree of credibility, apt grammatical use and a neutral tone. It did not used obtain a good article because it did use some articles that could be slightly biased, which could jeopardize the neutral tone the author attempted to incorporate within the article.