User:Justice Junky/Evaluate an Article

Article Evaluated:

Opioid epidemic in the United States

Lead Section:

The lead section of this article is concise. It includes necessary details to help the reader understand what will be covered in the article without going into too much detail. I think the first sentence encompasses the bulk of the article's topic. It describes the opioid epidemic as an ongoing issue. I like the wording used in the introductory sentence because it provides a lot of space to build on the topic later in the article. The lead gives a brief description of topics in the article. I think there should have been more written about the different demographics that are discussed at the end of the article. There is a small portion, but I think there is more that needs to be talked about in the lead. There should have been at least one sentence talking about the use of "waves" to differentiate the impact of the opioid epidemic throughout the years. That topic is the bulk of the article so it should have been mentioned at least once.

Content:

The history portion is outdated. The information stops at 2019 but a lot has happened since then. The most recent information is on fentanyl which is relevant but there should be more added to the history portion for sure. All of the information is relevant to the topic, and it is very detailed. One thing that is missing is information of the disproportionate impact of the opioid epidemic on black communities. There was some information on this towards the beginning of the article but there is a lot more that needs to be added. The race portion under the demographic section doesn't talk about disproportionate impacts and what leads to them. The portion that talks about the COVID - 19 epidemic seems redundant. This could have been included briefly in the history portion. There isn't really a need for multiple paragraphs on the topic because the evidence connecting COVID - 19 to the opioid epidemic is still lacking. Whoever wrote this portion even said something about a lack of research so it shouldn't be included until there is more definitive research. I didn't see any information of difficulties getting adequate treatment among different communities.

Tone and Balance:

This article doesn't sway towards on position or another. All of the information I read was fact based and did not lean on individual opinion.

Sources:

I checked a few of the sources used and they were all reliable. The information from the article aligned with what was found in the sources as well.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The writing was good quality and i didn't notice any spelling or grammatical errors. I will say that the organization could be fixed a little. Like is said the COVID-19 portion didn't seem like it really fit. It should be moved. The portion under "Countermeasures" is a little bit confusing. The information under this section could be organized differently or another heading should be created to separate the information.

Images:

The images and media included connect well with the content of the article and allow for better understanding of the statistics.

Talk Page:

The article is rated C so there is some stuff that can be fixed. The talk page has been inactive for 3 months. The discussions are mostly about definitions and wording used. There were also updates made to the images because there was a discussion about what would best represent the topic.

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)