User:Kennethlewis29/Evaluate an Article
<nowiki>Insert non-formatted text here<br>
Insert non-formatted text here<nowiki>Insert non-formatted text here</nowiki></nowiki>
 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.
Sources and ReferencesA Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved. |
Which article are you evaluating?[edit]
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?[edit]
The reason why I chose this article is because I am very interested in the prosthesis and how they are becoming more and more like real limbs.
Evaluate the article[edit]
This is a very good article. This article has a very good introductory sentence that clearly describes what Prosthesis is , which is a prosthetic implant an artificial device that replaces a missing body part which may had been lost through trauma. The article talks about number of different types of prosthetic such as upper extremity prostheses which are shoulder disarticulation, transhumeral prosthesis, elbow disarticulation, transracial prosthesis, wrist disarticulation, full hand, partial hand, finger. This article talks about so many prosthetic implant that I can tell that its very up to date. This article also talks about the earliest evidence of prosthetics appeared in ancient Egypt and Iran. The article doesn't really state all the cons of having a prosthetic implant, but it does say that prosthetic implant are not like have a real limb but it can do basic movement that your limbs used to do. I can at least say that balance is more on the pro side than the cons. All facts in the article are up to date and are back by reliable secondary source of information , that what surprise me about how good the information is backed up by good sources. I also made sure the links works as well.
The article is broken down to sections which are types ,history ,Technology Patient procedure ,Current technology and manufacturing, and so on. This article shows many pictures of prosthetic , it shows one picture of above the knee prosthetic, artificial limbs. The images is very well capture, there is one picture with a leg prosthetic that shows how the prosthetic fit on a human body. These images really enhance the understanding of prosthetic. As I read the article its overall strength is the information on the topic prosthesis , but I would say that the article weakest is the images I would had like to see images of more of the prosthetics. This article is rated C-class which means its useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately study. Which I believe that its true, historical history and also modern day history of the prostheses. I feel like if the article just had little of the history of prostheses it would had reach completeness.