User:Haylee Petroski/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Flight nurse

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I have chosen this article to evaluate because of the importance of flight nurses to me and everyone in the world. Flight nurses are very reliable in the world and should be explain correctly and effectively for nurses who are interested in this type of field.

Evaluate the article
Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the articles topic?

This leads out well but will need more information about what a flight nurse before is leading into the care of patients during rescue operations. I also insist more on what a flight nurse procedure are before explaining who else is attending on the helicopters or aircrafts.

Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major selection?

Yes, this is a very brief description of a flight nurse but should be more detailed leading into the contents to give the readers more of an idea of what they will be interpreting in the rest of the article.

Does the lead include information that is not present in the article?

One topic that I think should not be included in the lead is who is attending with you on the helicopter or aircraft. For this reason, in a lead of an article should only be about what a flight nurse is and what they do in their everyday life work. I would include the other attenders in a different part of this article. I also think the critical care experience, factors of the altitude and changes in pressure, and the factors of what the patient will be experiencing should be in its own content rather than the fight paragraph you interpret.

Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

In my opinion I think the lead is overly detailed. A lead should only be a brief statement on what your topic is about and what you will be explaining about in future parts of the content.

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

In my opinion I do not think explaining a type of flight nurse in Australia is right for this article. Yes, it could be fit in into this article with but with additionally countries as well but not as it own content/topic. There is missing content on the education part that will need some clarification.

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia’s quite gaps? does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia’s gaps. It also does not relate to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of the one position or away from another?

The article does attempt to persuade a reader into favoring a flight nurse position. I feel like adding more experiences you will make while being a flight nurse would make this article more exciting or interesting in becoming a flight nurse.

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

Yes, the sources explain different flight nurses in other countries which the authors are. Yes, they include the historical way of flight nurses from early ages and from types of flight nurses such as the Air Force.

Is the article well written- i.e., is it concise, clear, and easy read?

In some parts it is easy to read, then when it comes to skills and practices is where it can get confusing and seems to be scattered around with different information.

Is the article well-organized is it broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

The article is well-organized and broke down into sections that for sure reflect major points of the topic but may need more added.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

It shows what a flight nurse looks like in the back but is very old. There is only one image on the whole article which there should be more and more up to date.

Are images well-captioned?

There is only one image as I said, and it is "the first United States nay flight nurse", Which is great to see this image but should be up to date images of a flight nurse more than this.

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

Yes, the articles content is relevant to the topic but should be more in detailed of each type of flight nurse also a way more explained process and skills of becoming flight nurse rather than jumping into the hours you need. The process and skills should be explained from the start of becoming a flight nurse to the end. Something that distracted me was the Australia content. Yes, it is very important to know about our other counties and its healthcare, in my opinion I do not think explaining a type of flight nurse in Australia is right for this article.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

In the article's own ways, it is neutral but not well stated with the resources provided. I feel like there should be more stated when researching these reliable sources and interpretations. No there are no claims that appear heavily biased. In my opinion I think the article needs more topics and more detailing explanations.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

One of the viewpoints that is overrepresented is the "certification process and skills". There is information that does not need to be stated in this content. This should be a well detailed topic but not as much as the performed tasks that they would be doing on the field. This should be its own topic. One that was underrepresented was the types of flight nurses, credentialing, and education. These topics are very important and should be listed detailed.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

Yes, most of them work. Yes, they reflect the available literature on the topic with the states of Australia and navy air positions. In my opinion I think more sources should be through what is a flight nurse.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

Yes, each fact is somewhat referenced with an appropriate reference. Some of the references are very descriptive but I feel not stating the important messages that we will need to know. No, they are not neutral resources they are more books or websites that don't exist on the website anymore. Some are also odd websites that I do not think should have been brought onto this article or Wikipedia. There is no biased this is more of stating facts of flight nurses rather than favoring into something.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

No, they are not current. The sources go back from 2020 to 2018 and all the way back to 2007. Most of the sources need to be updated to current sources.

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

On the talk page, there is one conversation explaining that the "consolidation" content should be listed in brief on the nursing article or renamed "medical transport" which discusses "the entire scope of the specialty since nurses are not only the medical practitioner involved in emergency air transport", as the talker stated. I agree with this person as well "medical transport" is a much valuable statement rather than consolidation and we can bring more information now using this type of stating. There is also someone who was explain the external links that should be modified which it something to make sure of. Other than this, there was not a lot of talkers for this page that made comments.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

The articled Is rated C-class, Low-importance. There is one wiki project called "wiki project occupations which is "a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of occupations." The rest is the C-class project's quality scale and on the low importance project scale.

Does the Wikipedia article achieve its rhetorical objective - to inform and educate audiences about a particular topic?

Yes, this article achieves its rhetorical objective. This topic is very important to nurse in training or nurses who are already flight nurses who would like to know more in detailed about their position.