User:Gcordova1/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Clinical physiology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose it because it has something to do with physiology in a clinical setting

Evaluate the articles
(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.)

- a lot of the information used isn’t recent most sources are around 2009 to 2013

- the article is relatively neutral and simply informs people about what clinical physiology is

- the links are usable and come from reputable sources.

- sources are medical journals

-sources are different authors and articles

- no images and other videos

- the talk page has a lot of edits helping the author add information to their article

-the article is part of wiki projects in medicine.

- talk page talked about how some of the citations didn’t work

- people added that there should be more distinction between the type of physiologist and how they differ

- the article can be strengthened by adding more detail and more visuals to look better

- the article seemed underdeveloped and needs more work