User:Erinstlcop/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: Falls in older adults
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This article is related to our research with UpToDate.

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 introductory sentence does describes articles topic but could be written out a little better. It doesn't necessarily give a brief overview of the major sections, just examples from the sections. It is pretty concise and does not include information that is not present in the rest of the article. The lead is not very organized.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The content is up-to-date as it was last updated September 11, 2020. The article could use more up-to-date references, reviews, and studies. The content is all relevant to the topic as it gives the causes, diagnosis, signs and symptoms, economics, and prevention to falls in older adults. It does not specify any underrepresented populations. Some of the content could be better written and communicated to make the article better.

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 seems to be neutral as it gives facts about falls in older adults. The research and history section seem to be a little underrepresented. The article does not seem to attempt at persuading the reader one way or the other.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Most of the sources do not seem to be current but the links do work. The sources are from a diverse spectrum of authors and they seem neutral as they are from reviews and credible science sources. Some of facts that are stated are not backed up by a source.

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 can be difficult to read at times as it is kind of all over the place. It is broken down into major sections but it could use some more organization. The article could also use some grammatical work as some sentences don't flow correctly.

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
The talk page has conversations relating to the article. The conversations are discussing how they have added or removed sections, topics, or sentences in the article. The article has been given the ratings of C-Class and Mid-importance. It's a part of WikiProject Medicine.

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 five things I would change about this article is:

1.The grammatical errors/ sentence structure

2.The organization of the sections because some sections are kind of hard to follow along

3.The sources because most of them are past the 5 year mark

4.The introduction as it is confusing and all over the place

5. Adding more citations within the article to back up the information stated

The articles I plan to use to make these changes are the articles like UpToDate and the ones our school provides in the library.

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 — ~

My favorite change to make will be the introduction.


 * Link to feedback: