User:Conradsay/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: Hopkins Emergency Response Organization
 * HERO is the student run EMT organization on Johns Hopkins Homewood Campus, transporting patients to Union Memorial Hospital and Johns Hopkins Hospital. It is aided by Lifeline, the critical care transport unit at Johns Hopkins Hospital, who trains HERO's new members.

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 does well in concisely summarizing what HERO basically is and what it does. However, that is basically all, it the lead is only a few sentences and doesn't outline what will be gone over in the article nor any details that may differentiate HERO from a dictionary definition of EMS. It could benefit from more information and detail, adding to what HERO is besides a basic definition.

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 very basic and vague in its description of HERO, with only 3 sources (one of which was blank). It seems like a lot of the information was put on by a past member of HERO as there is some detailed information, but no link to the source of the information. Most of the information is about the structure of HERO, it could benefit from information on its day to day operations, responsibilities, controversies, etc. It could also be updated, as it mentions its founding and structure, but no mention of how the organization has changed since its inception in 2006.

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 article does remain neutral, as it only has basic definition and summary of the organization, and it does well in describing the structure of the organization.

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?

Sources and references evaluation
Of the three source, two worked, one of which was from the Hopkins University Newspaper. The other was from the National Collegiate EMS Foundation and only proved that HERO received an award in 2016. The source from the Hopkins University Newspaper was from 2006 at the founding of HERO and really has no current information on the organization.

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
The article is quick and easy read, with no or few grammatical or spelling errors. The page is easily navigated and the section topics were relevant and accurate.

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?

Images and media evaluation
N/A, article could have benefited from an image of the organizations emblem, founding members, location pictures, etc.

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
No conversations in the talk page. The article was rated as a stub and of low-importance and part of wikiprojects medicine and Maryland.

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
The article was rated as a stub, the lowest level of quality for a Wikipedia page, and as a low-importance topic. I would agree with this evaluation for the overall status of the article as it really is a basic summary of a small campus organization with little relevance to the world at large. The article does well in remaining neutral and providing information clearly and concisely. It could be improved in its overall content, it really does not do justice to the topic as it is underdeveloped/unsupported in the information it does include. The topic needs more sources supporting the information, expansion on day to day operations and responsibilities and links to topics referenced.

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: