User:Jwisniewski936/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: (Hepatitis B vaccine)
 * I am pretty sure there is already an article in Wikipedia regarding Hepatitis B, and the vaccine is addressed to some extent in that article. I could not easily find a Hepatitis B Vaccine article.

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? maybe? The lead does not read easily.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Overly detailed. Four solid paragraphs with information that does not flow and is not always found in the article below.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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, missing information. The most detailed section of the article is the history, rather than the medical applications and information.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Mostly, but some language is ambiguous, as the author(s) write "seem to" multiple times throughout the article, either minimizing actual conclusions or overstating inconclusive published works.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? It is clearly written by someone who has sources from the UK, and only references UK studies and data.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No. There are scattered sentences that have no citation.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources look more thorough than the article.
 * Are the sources current? yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? no. It is ok, but there is definitely some roughness to the flow, some pieces about vaccines, this one especially, that are missing.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I noticed
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It is broken down into sections, but it is missing things.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Only one image of a hepatitis B vaccine box from Japan was included in the beginning, but there were no photos otherwise.
 * Are images well-captioned? yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? unknown
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? It looks fine

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The general consensus is that this article is really confusing and needs to be re-written
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? For WikiProject Medicine, it is rated B, and Mid-importance. It is potentially part of WikiProject Pharmacology, but has not been rated for that project.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This "article" is a collection of "facts," some of which are dubious and imply things that are potentially untrue.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is published, with people most recently commenting and editing in 2019.
 * What are the article's strengths? It is the only hep B vaccine article
 * How can the article be improved? It needs so much more science and unbiased presentation of all the information available about the hepatitis B vaccine. The only side effect listed is pain at the site of injection (the sentence is copied and pasted). The CDC is only mentioned once and only two sources are from the CDC.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped.

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: