User:21killma/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Infection

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I went onto the academic disciplines category and clicked on clinical physiology, from there I found the infectious diseases pages and chose to evaluate the page "infection".

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

The introduction tells us the definition of what an infection is and then diverges into different information about infections that don't really pertain to the subsections. The author references how mammalian hosts fight infections, but does not include information or references to non-mammalian hosts and how they deal with infections. The information included seemed random and sporadic.

Content

The article does not talk about equity gaps, but the article has up-to-date and relevant information throughout the entire article. The information presented after the lead is quite interesting and is formatted nicely, there doesn't seem to be anything out of place.

Tone & Balance

The tone is extremely neutral and purely academic. There are no personal touches added and everything could be referenced from a science textbook.

Sources & References

Some of the sources referenced in the back are up to date, but most of the sources are from the late 90's, early 2000's. The links in the article work and whenever a reference is needed in the text a source is there to back it up.

Organization and Writing Quality

The article is extremely organized. It could be more concise, there are a couple instances of repetitive sentences but no grammatical issues.

images and Media

Images are quite sparse in this article, a couple images (toe image) I feel is not needed/they could have used a better picture of an infection for shock value. Tables are used in an amazing manner to enhance understanding of material. This article could use more pictures, and more interesting ones at that.

Talk Page Discussion

This article is a part of WikiProject Medicine and is a level-3 vital article in Health & Medicine. The article is a C-class article. The discussion behind the scenes is a little sparse, but each question has to do with adding content/improving the article quality.

Overall Impressions

I can tell that this article isn't of top-notch A tier quality, however it is still a fantastic article and is necessary to flesh out Wikipedia's scope of written knowledge. Formatting and use of tables was very pleasing, the introduction was the main thing that suffered in this article because it was less of an introduction to the article and more of a couple paragraphs of fun facts.