User:Gcuties/Evaluate an Article

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because i was interested in the topic because i was diagnosed with gestational diabetes and wanted to know more about it. The topic was well explained in the beginning however as the words got more technical it became harder to understand and read.

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

Lead Section
I picked the article Gestational diabetes. I was interested in the topic because of my body inability to Produce insulin while I’m pregnant. The Article started by defining the term, the symptoms associated with the “disease” and the long term effect if left unchecked. In the Lead section the author also briefly explained with supported evidence how Gestational Diabetes occurs during pregnancy, the risk factors associated with it and how to prevent. All of which are some the major section sections of the article

Content
all in all the content is relevant to the topic at hand. However it seems directed toward ma more knowledgeable crowd. There are a lot of scientific terms - Although relevant to the topic - Make the article hard to read and comprehend without reviewing the cited documents attached. The article was published back in 2006 and has since been updated troughout the years with the last update being in July 2021.

Tone and Balance
In this Article the author is no trying to convince the readers of anything in particular. He is informing us of a particular condition that many pregnant woman face. He is in no way bias in his writing. He is only stating facts supported by other scientists trough other medical and scientific research.

Sources and references
Most of the author statements are supported by well cited sources. Although some are marked (medical citation needed), so those statement should be removed from the article and replaced with proper evidence. Some of them include scientific term and type of gestational diabetes, it would have been helpful to the readers if the proper source was attached to the statement. In the talk section some of the contributors discuss some important missing points to the article, however some of those were not added into the article, they were only discussed in the talk section.

Organization and writing quality
the article is well organized it goes from the definition of the term to how it occurs in pregnant women to the scientific pathway of the process and so on. Even though i believe it’s well written, it is a difficult article to read, because of all the technical term and no chart of pictures that breaks it down for you

Overall impression
overall this article isn’t the best one out there, to inform you about Gestational diabetes. If you’re not related to the medical field, this article will be hard to read and comprehend because of the lack of simple language i would say. The article lacks pictures and other graphic materials i believe would make it easier for someone to understand the pathways and chemical component discussed in the content.