User:Giangpham17/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Nancy T. Chang

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 am really interested in reading bibliography, especially women scientists. I acknowledged that women scientists are less representative as male scientists. Therefore, it motivates me to contribute my effort change this problem. Promoting women scientists' information to public viewers will help empower other girls pursue this field. I am Asian and love immunology, so Nancy Chang is an interesting scientist I want to know more. My preliminary impression about this article is well-organized. It provided well-rounded information about her work and life, but the reference is not as much as other articles.

Evaluate the article
The lead section did a great job in briefly introduce about Nancy and her success as healthcare entrepreneur. The introduction sentence clearly summarize the topic and not mention any information outside of the article.

I think the contain put too much weights on her career and neglect the biography part. I would suggest to add more about her families, which include many talented scholars that inspired her pursue academic path. Also, I also would like to add the information about her first belief as becoming the medical doctor, but then switch to pursue science. Also, in the "Work" path, I believe that the article should also address that she had to follow her husband to Baylor College of Medicine with no job, because Chinese traditional belief that wives have to follow and support husbands' career, but she still can land a job on her own and even together with her husband to start up Tanox. Providing this information will show how Nancy followed traditions but still can do what she wants to do.

The tone and balance are good.

The sources are secondary sources and up to date. However, I think this article need more sources to be reliable, because most information comes from same source.

I would suggest some more sources:, [ https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt0987-940 ] and other articles that are published. The publications can be separated to a completed part.

This article is well-written and well-organized.

This article included her image and interview videos.

The talk page just has one person that mentions he/she already add more external links to the article. This article is rated B and under multiple Wiki Projects include: Science and Academia, Chemistry, Women scientists.

Overall, I believe that article is clear, professional, well-developed and well-rounded information about Nancy T Chang. However, it needs to be add more citations. The article's strength is simple but direct and enough information to understand her contribution as a scientist and a healthcare entrepreneur. However, more information can be added to highlight her effort to overcome gender inequality to pursue her dream. ~