User:Amymu123/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: Immigrant health care in the United States
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this specific article because I am interested in learning more about the healthcare system in the United States and how it can be improved to help disadvantaged populations.

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * 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?

==== Lead evaluation: The lead's introductory sentence does describe the main topic of the article but but doesn't mention some of the major sections of the article, such as the opposing viewpoints on this subject. It does however contextualize the importance of policy and opinion with the reference to social and political environment. The lead is concise. ====

Content
Guiding questions:


 * 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?

==== Content evaluation: The content is relevant to the topic and appears to be relatively recent (around 2014-2016 as the most recent information mentioned). The Findings and Statistics section can include information on other immigrants, as this article is limited to children, women, Hispanics/Latinos, and Asians. The article discusses legislation of the Obama administration, but doesn't appear updated to mention the actions of the Trump administration. ====

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * 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?

==== Tone and balance evaluation: The tone is rather objective for the most part. It does seem that the author is in favor of improved healthcare benefits for immigrants, but it doesn't seem like they are trying to convince readers of that. ====

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * 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:


 * 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?

==== Organization evaluation: For the most part, the article is not too verbose. I didn't find many serious grammatical or spelling errors. The sections are reflective of the major points of the topic but seem a bit limited in scope. ====

Images and Media
Guiding questions:


 * 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:


 * 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?

==== Talk page evaluation: On the talk page, most of the conversation appears to be about improving the article (i.e. suggestions of concise writing). There is little discourse on the topic itself. The article is rated C-class. It is part of Medicine, Discrimination, and Human rights. One thing that I found surprising was that it was rated low-importance in all Wikiprojects. ====

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * 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?

==== Overall evaluation: I think the weakest part of the article is its limitation in scope. That being said, it does a good job of the explanation itself. I found those to be relatively clear for the most part. I would say that this article is underdeveloped. ====

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: Talk:Immigrant health care in the United States