User:Brianna Fleshman/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Humorism

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article to evaluate because it follows the same content discussed in my course. I also just went over the 4 humors and feel I have an idea on the topic. I also find the topic interesting and would like to know more about it.

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.)

Leading Section:
The leading section only contains one sentence. The sentence is very concise and states the main point of the article. It does include the articles main sections that will be talked about, which is very convenient. It is lacking in more information about what the article says. It also does not allow a brief overview of the article that could be useful for someone who doesn't want to read all the sections.

Content:
The content is relevant to the topic and does not state anything that is off-topic. The content looks up to date with the current known facts. There were also interesting facts about how different cultures used Humoral medicine. The content was well rounded and included: the initial discovery, what made up humoral medicine (4 humors), the theory of how the humors are produced, and how this idea effected medicine up until the 21st century. Nothing seemed out of place or off topic which makes the information easier to read. There was not much representation of groups in the article due to the article being about a theory of medicine.

Tone and Balance:
The article has a neutral view point. There have been mentions of those that opposed the idea of humorism and those that supported it. Both groups were respected in the article and their opinions were stated in equal representation. The article was fair and equal; it did not try and sway the reader. There was no mention of minority groups in the article. The article did mention different cultures and regions which practiced humorism and the writing was respectful and gave a good detailed view into their uses of medicine.

Sources and References:
Each fact in the Humorism article as a citation. The secondary sources are valid and reliable. There is a source for every main idea that is stated our made. The sources cover a broad range from the origins of Humorism to its use in different cultures and regions. Most of the sources are from the 1990s to the early 2010s. The recent sources allow for a more accurate article. The sources are from a variety of authors and journals. Most of the sources look credible and not biased toward one side. The sources are a mixture of peer reviewed journals and a couple websites that look reliable. The links to the references are current and they work.

Organization and Writing Quality:
The organization of the article is effective. The sections are laid out to ease the reader into the knowledge and facts. It starts with the origins of Humorism and gradually builds. It makes it easier for the reader to understand and comprehend the information. There is little to no grammar errors and the language used is comprehendible by all audience types.

Images and Media:
The article does include images and tables that help the reader to understand more about the topic. There are captions on each figure and they are concise and informative. All images are up to date on Wikipedia's copyright policies. Each image has a link to where the image was originally retrieved from. The visual media is located in appropriate sections and do not distract or disrupt the flow of the article.

Talk Page Discussion:
The conversations on the talk page are mostly about fixing incorrect facts or inconsistencies. There a couple edits where links and references have been added, and a slight debate over the wording "Humorism" or "Humourism" which was settled. The article is apart of three wikiprojects, one being the Religion/ Interfaith which it is rated as Start-Class. Overall the article is rated at mid importance, B-Class. This article discusses the four humors from Galen's perspective, which is different then what we learned in class. It also describes how humorism was used in Islamic, Perso-Arabic, and western culture. There was also a section on how the humors are produced from the foods we eat which was more in depth than what we learned originally.

Overall Impressions:
The article overall is well written and very informative. The article had great organization and range of facts. I learned something new about humorism. The language used in the article was easy to read, especially for someone who is not an expert on the topic. The article could improve on the lead section. It could be more detailed or have a summary of the main points of the article. This will allow people to get a feel for the topic without reading the whole page. I also think there is room for more facts and some points could be more elaborated on. For example, I would like to see how humorism or the four humors has affected medicine in the 21st century more. I would say that this article is well-developed but not complete yet. The article has more potential that can be added on to it.