User:GeoMedrek/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article: Levothyroxine
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: Levothyroxine
- I chose this article because I know that Levothyroxine is one of the most commonly prescribed medications in the country. In addition, other classmates have mentioned it when discussing their hormone related diseases as an area that needs more research.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
The introductory sentence provides the name and classification of the drug which is the first thing to know to anyone researching the topic. The following description provides an overview of the drug which can then be seen further defined later in the page into different sections. It's abstract enough for the reader but also detailed enough to get a good understanding of the drug.
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
Lead evaluation
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
Sectioned off into Medical use, Contraindications, Interactions, Mechanism of action, Pharmacokinetics, History, and Society and culture. Data cited is within the past ten years. The date is sorted good by prioritization, science first and the history second.
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Is the content up-to-date?
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
Content evaluation
[edit]Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
Article is clearly written in a neutral stance. Information is presented as facts and not insinuation.
- Is the article neutral?
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
Sources such as Mayo Clinic, AACE, FDA and ATA are used to confirm information. Plenty of sources are used throughout the article. All links tested, work.
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Are the sources current?
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
Article flows well, corresponding to topic title. No grammatical errors whatsoever.
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Organization evaluation
[edit]Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Are images well-captioned?
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
Images and media evaluation
[edit]Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Talk page evaluation
[edit]Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
The article is complete and provides good, neutral source of information. It organizes information in an order that makes sense to someone researching Levothyroxine. The article does great by citing sources and linking them for further research.
- What is the article's overall status?
- What are the article's strengths?
- How can the article be improved?
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
Overall evaluation
[edit]Optional activity
[edit]- 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 — ~~~~
- Link to feedback: Talk:Levothyroxine#Negative formulary
Evaluate an article: Duke of Normandy
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: Duke of Normandy
- The Dukedom of Normandy has a very wild history and goes back to times where history may not of been accurately recorded and was the subject of much heated debate in the day as it was held by a foreigner (to France) for some time.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
The intro provides a general and clear statement as to what the Duke of Normandy is. Following, it includes the highlights of the duchy title. Every detail mentioned in the intro is broken down further along in the article. The Lead provides a direct generalization of the topic but allows room for more.
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
Lead evaluation
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
The content is organized from first recorded to most recent and is relevant to the article.
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Is the content up-to-date?
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
Content evaluation
[edit]Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
The article does not seem to have a bias in a certain direction. There are many branches of the dukedom discussed. It does not attempt to persuade the reader but absolutely inform the reader.
- Is the article neutral?
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
Yes, all facts are provided with evidence based research from either first hand sources or professional reassurance.
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Are the sources current?
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
Yes, as stated before the article flows from earliest to latest.
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Organization evaluation
[edit]Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
The article provides a picture of the lineage of the title which provides enough information for the audience to quickly follow the passage.
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Are images well-captioned?
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
Images and media evaluation
[edit]Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
The talks surround the passing of the title and how other rulers obtained it. In addition, it details how the title was used by major known holders. It's a C-class article. It's part of a Norse history and culture, Middle Ages, Normandy, and Royalty projects.
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Talk page evaluation
[edit]Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
The article can be strengthen by adding an event timeline and not just that of rulers to describe what is happening in the dukedom at a time.
- What is the article's overall status?
- What are the article's strengths?
- How can the article be improved?
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
Overall evaluation
[edit]Optional activity
[edit]- 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 — ~~~~
- Link to feedback: Talk:Duke of Normandy#Executed 100 Christians after his death