User:Vvengsarkar/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

• Name of article: Sheehan's syndrome
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

Guiding questions

The Lead does include an introductory sentence that briefly describes the article's topic. However, it does not include a description of the article's major sections. The Lead appears to be concise overall and not very detailed. It does not include information that is not present in the article.

• 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?

Content

Guiding questions

The article's content appears to be relevant to the topic since the article describes various subheadings such as signs/symptoms, causes, pathophysiology etc. The content seems to be up-to-date as the most recent citation is from 2016. However, not all of the information is current since some references date back to the early 2000s. There is some content that is missing or could otherwise be expanded upon. For example, a section on research seems to be absent. The information under the subheadings of pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and epidemiology seem to be severely lacking in detail and scientific references.

• 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?

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

The article portrays the information in a neutral and unbiased fashion. No claims made seem to be heavily biased toward a particular position and no viewpoints seem to be over-represented or underrepresented. The article does not persuade the reader in any position and the article does a good job of maintaining a scientific, neutral tone throughout the paper.

• 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?

Sources and References

Guiding questions

The facts in the article are backed up by reliable secondary sources of information like the Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism and the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine. The sources seem to be somewhat thorough since they are culminations of previous research performed on Sheehan's syndrome based on the respective citations/references. The sources seem to be current and the links are functional.

• 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?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

Guiding questions

The article is concise and clear but lacking in flow and connecting ideas from one sentence to another. Sometimes, the article reads as a list of facts that are strung together. There does not seem to be any grammatical or spelling errors and the overall structure of the article is well-organized according to the sub-headings.

• 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?

Images and Media

Guiding questions

The article does not include any images, which can detract from the reader's overall understanding of Sheehan's Syndrome.

• 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?

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions

There is very little history to the Talk page, but some discussions are related to hyperlinks and validity of some of the statements made in the article. The article is rated S for start-class, which means that it is a preliminary article that needs to be worked on. It is part of WIkiProjects Medicine and WikiProjects Women's Health. This topic was not discussed in class.

• 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?

Overall impressions

Guiding questions

The article's overall status is incomplete and needs more information to expand on some of the points made as well as to establish a proper background for the subject. The article's strengths is that the information presented is concise and very brief. However, as mentioned previously, the article would benefit from continued edits and additions to the overall article in order to provide a more complete understanding to the reader. I would also recommend additional references to more recent works in order to provide the most current understanding of this topic. Overall, I would assess this article as being underdeveloped.

• 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?

Optional activity

• 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: