User:Chase.ingersoll23/Evaluate an Article

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I believe that communication between a client and doctor or someone taking care of you is extremely important and if done incorrectly can affect your health in the long run. My preliminary impression of this article was that it is very wordy and seems possibly one sided or biased when reading the intro.

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.)

In the lead section of this article it has a nice intro sentence, and it goes over the sections that will be discussed throughout the article, it also does not talk about anything outside of the article. It may be a little to long and could be shortened by not saying the same thing about communicating to the patients.

In the content section it does a great job, all of the content is about the specific topic. It definitely needs to be updated, it states that it may be out of date which means it needs to be reassessed. There is no content missing and nothing is out of place. It does not cover an equity gap because this topic is discussed quite frequently.

For the Tone & Balance section of this article it is generally neutral although they do tend to lean strongly towards the side of how important communicating is. The campaigns section of the article is over-presented, it gave to much info on past examples instead of things happening right now. I would say they definitely try to persuade everyone to liking health communications throughout the article.

The sources listed are all very strong sources, there is a diverse amount of authors that they got their information from. They do reflect what this topic is talking about. They lack because they are not very up to date the most recent one is 2010 meaning this article needs updated. Yes the links do work but a lot of the websites are either under maintenance or can not be reached because they are gone. There are much better sources now which were not even around back then, if it were to be updated you could use some new articles.

The writing is not very professional it is written like a paper for a school project, there is strong grammar throughout. It is broken into good sections all that come back to the main topic of the article.

There are no images in this article which hurts it's appearance drastically. If it had images people with visual minds could understand what is happening much better.

In the Talk Page only two comments have been made, both to help improve the article. One of them says they need to elaborate further about the strategies and methods sections, because 3 forms of communications are listed but not elaborated on. There is no rating on the article. This article is related to our class because you must question everything that is being spoken of throughout the article I was breaking down everything being stated and looking through and using the CRAAP method to make sure everything is reliable. It is in Wiki project Media.

The article is very solid it is just so out of date that you can not take it as serious as it should be. It must be updated to be taken into consideration as a good article. The strengths are the layout and all the discussions come back to the main topic. The weakness's are how out of date it is and that it does have a significant amount of bias in it. To improve this article it needs to become up to date. It is a well developed article throughout.