User:AMR2024/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_medicine)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I have chose to edit the Sports Medicine Wikipedia page because I plan to have a career in sports medicine after I complete all my schooling. I am very familiar with the world of sports medicine and how it operates. My preliminary impression of the article is that it is extremely accurate and has been crafted in a proper manner.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The lead section is very informative and highlights the major sections that come later in the article. It doesn't touch on everything single thing mentioned in the article, however, I wouldn't expect it to. The content is not only relevant, but it also appears to be fully up to date. The only thing I can find missing is that injections (steroid, gel, and PRP) are not mentioned in the "Treatment for sports injuries". These are commonly used as a form of treatment, so they should definitely be added. The article appears to be neutral and represent all viewpoints fairly. All the facts are backed up in the article by accredited intuitions and peer reviewed articles. The sources are current and written by a diverse spectrum of authors. All the links I checked worked and went to reliable sources such as the National Library of Medicine. The article is perfectly organized and makes total sense. I would give this article a 48/50.

AMR2024 (talk) 15:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)