User:150.108.240.74/sandbox

Physiology Article Review ¥	Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? The references mentioned are from reliable sources. However not all of the facts mentioned in the article are supported by a reference, such as the information about The Physiological Society or the information mentioned in the Human Physiology section. ¥	Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? The article focuses heavily on the history rather than the science of physiology. The timeline of events doesn’t flow or connect ideas together. ¥	Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The author included a section devoted solely to the contributions of women in physiology.

¥	Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Most of information comes from reliable sources such as textbooks and publications. However, the references also include websites that’s can’t be fully verified or have some bias such as the one that is jwa.org. There is a reference for the Cori cycle from “TheFreeDictionary.”

¥	Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The author does not provide information about the contributions of men in physiology. The author mentions Knut Schmidt-Nielsen and George Bartholomew without stating their connection to the field of physiology. The author also does not provide detailed information about the discoveries or contributions made. For example, the author states that “Gertrude Elion, along with George Hitchings and Sir James Black, received the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1988 for their development of drugs employed in the treatment of several major diseases, such as leukemia, some autoimmune disorders, gout, malaria, and viral herpes” but does not gave adequate descriptions of the discovery and its importance as a contribution to physiology. ¥	Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? There is a google.com reference for “Medline across cultures” which opens up to a google books link instead. The line “Gertrude Elion,[22] along with George Hitchings and Sir James Black, received the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1988 for their development of drugs” is taken directly from the source. ¥	Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? The latest date for a discovery noted in the women in physiology section is dated 2009. The history section ends at 1954. The author should elaborate on more recent scientific discoveries. How does the Wikipedia article compare to the ways we've discussed this topic in class? Does it align? What information might be incorrect or missing? The article is missing relevant information about the field. More information can be added to the subdisciplines section. The intro section should also be organized.