User:Katvansickle/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Health communication

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I want to learn more about health communications. I did not know much about the topic before but I now understand the importance of communicating health related information to the mass public as well as an individual. Limiting confusion is a key role in health communication.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section: The first thing I noticed above the lead section was the big orange exclamation point saying that this article has some errors. As I read the lead it seems a bit short but does introduce the topic on a broad scale. The lead does introduce some of what the article talks about, but I don’t believe it mentions all of what is discussed in this article.

Content: Some sections have more information than others, for example the strategies and methods section appear much longer and has more information than the other sections. I don’t believe the information is up to date, when I looked through the sources, they all seemed dated. There is an overview section that is later in the article instead of in the beginning or in the lead section.

Tone and Balance: The tone throughout this article seemed very neutral and was very explanatory about what is health communications. The claims had some kind of information to go along but some of the information is a bit dated, there are some peer reviewed scholarly sources and sources but there are also some less reliable references used one for example is in the smallpox article.

Sources and References: The information is a bit dated, and some articles are reliable sources. In the challenges section there are some missing sources that needed to be inserted. Some of the references do not open with the link or have a link, for example on reference numbers four and thirty-one. Source number seven when you click on the link it does not open to the source. Here are some more current peer reviewed sources https://escholarship.org/content/qt0434b0cj/qt0434b0cj.pdf?t=r9m7zp and https://ajph.aphapublications.org/

Organization and writing quality: There are a lot of repeating of the same claims, they kept defining health communications throughout the article. In the research section I had a hard time following along I feel like it was not very clear. The article does not flow very well, the overview should go before the other sections or even be incorporated into the lead section. I also think the sections don’t contain all the correct information, there is information that belongs in certain sections that are found in other sections. In the overview it provided key information about COVID 19 that could be put in the strategies and methods because it looks a little out of place in the overview.

Images and Media: There is one image inserted by the direct marketing area and I don’t believe it is cited correctly. There is a caption that explains the image. Since there is only one image the layout does not look visually appealing. The image I don’t know what section it is for or what example it is supposed to go with.

Talk Page discussion: I only saw two comments on the talk page, but they posed good questions and added beneficial information. One person stated that there was no mention of multilingual societies and also talked about HIPPA which is very important especially with anything that deals with health. This article has been rated as a start class on the quality scale for the wikiproject and is in the scope for both the wikiproject media and medicine.

Overall Impressions: The article has some good and important information, it just needs to be organized and worded a bit better as well, maybe update some other sections. The talk page brings up so good questions that can be beneficial for adding some more new information that can be helpful. Less repetition throughout the article will also help improve it as well as adding in some new sources. Adding some more photos to improve the visual appearance. I believe this article is underdeveloped and it needs some work but the information there is a good starting point.