User:HailML/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Betamethasone

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 to evaluate the article because I have knowledge about drugs such as corticosteroids. I also chose this article because they did not use a wide variety of references, left out references, or included original research. My initial impression of this article was that it was short and could have included more elaboration on the drug itself and the mechanism of action. I also felt like the information included was good to include however, it seemed like it was not well organized with similar thoughts spaced throughout the entire article

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 like.)

The intraductory sentance is very very consice to the point where it just says it is a steroid medication. The lead section is a summary of the article which is consice and does illustrate the subsections of the article. The issue arises in the examples, rhumatic diseases were mentionned in the lead section, however, were not mentionned in the other subsection for medication uses. In the subsection, they could have said rhumatic diseases such as the following...

The content of the article in my opinion is missing a few key features such as what the medications do such as the mechanism of action. Some of the references are out of date and some of these were examples for original research.

This article is more of a paper describing the drug in general and i did not preceive the tone being steared towards one view point or another. For the most part the article was describing the drug and the side effects of the drug.

Some references say original research and others need another source presented. The citations could use some more work with finding ones that are more evidence based especially for finding medical uses. Such as finding medical uses which are more common compared to some that are not universally known or grounded in evidence. Some of the references could be switched to use more primary based research as opposed to using edvidence with websites that provides ads in them.

The article is very consice, however, it seemed like there was some repetition between the lead section and the subsections and some sections seem underdevelopped. The subsections should be revised and maybe add more subsections or change the order to make sure that the information flows through the page. Such as What is Betamethasone, Medical uses, What does it do, and Side effects of the medication.

The only image in the article was of how the drug molecule looks like. There was no caption associated with the image, but I did like how the clinical data, the pharmacodynamic data, and identifiers for the molecule.

The talk page seemed to have addressed some concerns in regards to content of this article.

Over all the article has good bones which needs to be revised and adding more information on how the drug works. This could also help with making the flow of the information much better. I did think that having other types of forms that were listed out, but delivery mechanisms could have been used instead with more elaboration to do so. Such as which ones would be injectables, creams, ointments, etc. There are many ways the article could be set up and it will depend on the person and how they think the flow of information works.