User:Jebradl1/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: Health information management
 * While it's not the most exciting subject to research, the page is difficult to understand, its categories are unorganized, and it includes many direct quotes that I think could be cleaned up. It also hasn't been overhauled since Jan 2010. Most of the links do not work.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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? No.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Is appropriately detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, but mostly a discussion about accreditation as opposed to actual job descriptions.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Needs to be checked.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Information about the nature of online classes is unnecessary. Also could use some examples of technology used in the new digital age of record keeping.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


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

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Most of the links are broken. I'll need to find new links to source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The few that work are thorough.
 * Are the sources current? No.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Probably not.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? No.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? No. Very redundant and dry.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Grammar.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? No. It needs to focus more on the nature of the industry instead of the accreditation of the schools that will get students the degrees necessary to work in the industry.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No.
 * Are images well-captioned? None to caption.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Mostly link repair and reference additions.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? C-class, top importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It does not represent the scope of its topic.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Confused.
 * What are the article's strengths? Provides useful information if reader cares enough to find it towards the bottom of the page.
 * How can the article be improved? More details about necessity and mentality as opposed to diploma requirements for employment.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Poorly 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: