User:Immcarle170/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
X-linked lymphoproliferative disease

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This is the article I will be evaluating for the course's wikipedia project.

Evaluate the article
Lead section

The lead section is severely lacking, simply mentioning that the disease is a lymphoproliferative disorder. It does not contain an informative topic sentence, a brief rundown of the article, but does not mention anything not contained in the rest of the article. It is much too concise.

Content

The content appears to all be relevant, but the sources appear to be slightly out of date (the newest source is from 2010). The article is quite short: there definitely could be more information added, but I think most of the content that is present belongs. The one exception would be the description of the life of Dr. David Theodore Purtilo, the doctor who discovered the disease. The article covers his life much too in-depth. The article does not address any equity gaps.

Tone and BalanceThe tone appears largely neutral and unbiased, although word choices such as "strangely" (in Presentation) give the article's voice a feeling of uncertainty at times. Concern about minority viewpoints or bias are not relevant to this article.

Sources and References

There are a few uncited sources, but for the most part, it seems as if claims are supported by sources. As mentioned before, the sources are not overwhelmingly current, but they do appear to reflect a large body of literature on the topic. There are better sources available, which I will evaluate and add to the article over the course of the term. The links present appear to function correctly.

Organization and Writing Quality

The writing quality is not incredible, but the article is well broken up into sections and is easy to read. I did not notice any major spelling or grammatical errors.

Images and Media

The article does not contain any images or media, although I imagine some could be included.

Talk page discussion

There does not appear to be any activity on the talk page. The article is rated as a "start", and is part of WikiProject Medicine.

Overall impressions

The article presents what little information it does include clearly and effectively, and serves to give a very general overview of the disease. The article can be improved most immediately by adding much more relevant information, updating its sources to be from more recent literature, and by adding relevant media. I would not say the article is poorly-developed, but it is certainly underdeveloped and far from complete.