User:JeannyAn/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Warfarin
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article to evaluate because it does not have much information that is important for a lay person who wants more information on warfarin. It does not have all the common side effects and it does not have a picture of the pill and the color it comes in. It does not list common drug drug interaction to watch for. It also does not explain what an INR is.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead gives a brief background and gives a brief introduction


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? yes

Content

 * Guiding questions

The articles content does talk about wafarin but it is very detailed in parts like the uncommon side effects and the list of all the vitamin K containing products. It should be more concise


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes: purple toe syndrome is very rare and unnecessary to add,

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

This article is explaining what warfarin is neutral, There is no position to give


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No position necessary
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? it views points that are underrepresented
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? NO

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

No its not all reliable since they are old. They should cite newer guidelines


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? YEs
 * Are the sources current? NO
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions

This article has very few information on it.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? No it rambles on the unimportant parts
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? no
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * should include more pictures on the pill color


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes for the chem portion
 * Are images well-captioned? yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The editing is less than a year old


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? just general editing facts
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? yes
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? No

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

it is considered a good article by wikipedia standard


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths? it gives a full summary to how it was made to the PK of the drug
 * How can the article be improved? It needs an explaination on INR and how drugs can effect INR not just vitamin K.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? this artcle is well-developed

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: