User:Hannayama/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Vaccine equity


 * Article Evaluation
 * There is very limited content in this article. There are only two different major topics and the rest are links and references. The introduction could be written in a more concise way. This article is not written from a neutral perspective and considering the political charge that vaccinations have, it should be altered. The sources and references are 'good' but there are no images/media. There is a lot that can be changed in this article. There are no images/graphs to support any of the content.


 * Sources
 * https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2202547

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Medicare (United States)


 * Article Evaluation
 * I am very impressed by the thoroughness of the article's content. The introduction is straight forward; although, it doesn't touch on all of the article's major sections. The article is very neutral and does not appear to persuade. The references and sources are all very reliable and thorough. Many are current and are written by both men and women (mostly men). It is organized well and I see no grammatical/spelling errors. There is a relatively good number of images to support the content.


 * Sources
 * https://soarworks.samhsa.gov/article/medicaid-and-medicare-overview

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Right to health


 * Article Evaluation
 * This is an argumentative piece that persuades the readers towards universal standards that provide equity in health. This is noted in the very beginning through a template message. The introduction makes it very clear that it seeks to persuade the readers rather than providing a neutral viewpoint. The references are reliable but they are mostly persuasive pieces as well. There are not many neutral points. The article itself is very well written and does the job at informing the audience of the benefits of treating health as a right.


 * Sources
 * https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/human-rights-and-health

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Social determinants of health


 * Article Evaluation
 * The introduction is very concise and clearly identifies the article's main topic. Most of the main sections are introduced and it is not overly detailed. The content is thorough but it can definitely incorporate more lenses to support the overall research. In should definitely mention in the introduction that the main focus is on American/Western ideals in the social determinants of health. There is very little context for the international conversation. The tone is neutral and there are no apparent signs of persuasion. The sources and references consist of many journals and research-based analysis on this topic of health. I find the writing style understandable. There are limited graphs/images.


 * Sources
 * https://www.ruralhealthinfo.org/topics/social-determinants-of-health

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Social inequality


 * Article Evaluation
 * The introductory sentence is very long-winded, perhaps it could be more concise. However, as the lead section, it does a very good job with touching on all of the major topics. Perhaps there are pieces of information in the intro that could be utilized elsewhere, over detailed information. The context itself is vert well thought-out and well-organized. The article is very neutral in tone but it definitely does not touch on the controversy around the beliefs that certain inequalities don't exist. This, in a sense, gets political. There are many sources available, many of which are journals. There are many images/graphs to support the content.


 * Sources
 * https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2017/wp152_2017.pdf