User:Journee Williams/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: Fraser Syndrome
 * I chose to evaluate this article because I wanted my Wiki page to have something to do with reproductive health and under one of the subcategories I saw this article and read into it more and it grabbed my attention as I had personally never heard of Fraser Syndrome.

Lead

 * Lead evaluation
 * The introductory sentence is very short however, it covers what the disorder is an "autosomal recessive congenital disorder". In the next sentence it states the person who first saw the syndrome and had an answer for its occurrence. The lead is concise but a little short but that could be explained by the fairly recent discovery of this disorder, which was in 1962. The lead does not provide an overview for the major sections in the article

Content

 * Content evaluation
 * The content is relevant to the topic as the sections describe the signs and symptoms and how this gene is passed through families as well as the diagnosis. The content, based off the reference dates, should be updated as most of them are over 10 years old. With that in mind I'm sure there is content missing, like research that has been conducted in the past five years. The article does not state that there may be a marginalized group that is disproportionately effected by Fraser Syndrome.

Tone and Balance

 * Tone and balance evaluation
 * Since it is a research article, there is not heavy persuasion present. The article is neutral.

Sources and References

 * Sources and references evaluation
 * The sources are kind of outdated as stated earlier. most if not all the references are in published medical journals that have been peer reviewed. I say most because some of the articles are blocked by a paywall. There are not enough photos/ biographies of the authors to confirm or deny that some of them come from underrepresented identities.

Organization

 * Organization evaluation
 * The article is well written and easy to navigate content wise but some of the medical vocabulary that may be tricky for a non-medical student to read so hyperlinks that lead to pages with the definitions of some of the words would made this article more accessible to a wider audience.

Images and Media

 * Images and media evaluation
 * The images provided aid in what the article is explaining like it shows a picture of a baby with the syndrome, then a diagram of "autozygosity mapping" which shows how the disorder is passed on, and finally a MRI scan of someone brain who has the syndrome, The images are placed within their respective articles which provides a visual aid.

Checking the talk page

 * Talk page evaluation
 * No one has said anything about this article but someone has added a cited another source. Its declared a C-Class article and placed as Low-importance by Wikipedia. It is a part of the medicine WikiProject.

Overall impressions

 * Overall evaluation
 * The overall status of this article is relatively low. The article is very informative however, it could use some help. There need to be more links to definitions so it is more readable for more people since this is a birth defect and pe.ople do give birth all the time :). I think it's been a while since someone has updated the article so I would call it underdeveloped at this time

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: