User:Kennedybreak/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: (link) Chronic condition
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have chosen this article to evaluate, because I believe that chronic condition is closely related to the course of Chronic Illness, Death, and Dying because the course often discusses chronic illnesses as well as the effects of having a chronic condition not only on a person's physical health but also their mental health. A chronic illness/condition also is often associated with dying and eventual death because many chronic illnesses are terminal illnesses such as cancer that lead to a quicker death.

Lead


 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. The introductory sentence gave what Chronic Condition is in a way that is easy to understand for everyone.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, the Lead included a brief description of the article's major sections such as types of chronic conditions and their effects on a population.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead does not include information that is not present in the article. It just gives an overview of the topic before diving into the subcategories/details of the topic.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise but it also gives an accurate portrayal of chronic condition without going into the details of individual chronic illnesses, their effects on society, risk factors, etc.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article's content is relevant to this topic because the subcategories/topics of Chronic Condition includes types of chronic conditions, risk factors, prevention, the effects of nursing on chronic condition, epidemiology of chronic conditions, economic impact, and social and personal impact. Types of chronic conditions, risk factors, and prevention were very informational and helpful in better understanding chronic conditions as a whole but nursing and epidemiology were less helpful. Economic impact and social/personal impact were also very helpful because it addressed chronic condition in ways more than just a person's physical health.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content is mostly up-to-date but some of the studies mentioned were from 2008, but the article explained how the data had not changed much since then. So while not all the information was super recent, it was still accurate with the known information today.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is no content that I can think of that was obviously missing from the topic. However, I think that there could have been more data or information regarding chronic condition and mental health because those topics are strongly correlated in regards to depression, suicide, etc. There could have also been more information regarding financial costs of chronic illnesses and how many are effected by the large costs of dealing with chronic conditions.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * The article provided lots of information regarding chronic conditions and data in the United States but it discussed little to no data regarding other countries, their primary risk factors, what they're doing to prevent chronic conditions, and how it effects their economies. It briefly addressed dealing with chronic illnesses between socioeconomic levels and the struggles that come along with this, but it did not elaborate on the topic very extensively.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article appeared to be neutral in regards to reporting facts and an overall concept of chronic condition. However, the article primarily contained data from the United States and lacked information regarding any other countries.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There were no claims that appeared heavily biased toward a particular position, but chronic illness is not necessarily a topic that would have a strong bias regarding any of the information provided. However, data for the United States was heavy while other countries were not, and some subtopics had more information than others.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Some viewpoints/subtopics that I thought were underrepresented was other country's views on chronic conditions as well as information regarding chronic condition and mental illness as well as financial costs and the way people treat chronic conditions based on gender.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of a certain position but rather just gives general evidence regarding the effects chronic conditions and society.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * It seems as though all of the facts in the article are backed up by a reliable source such as journals that summarize a study's findings.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources appear to be thorough as they are journals, systematic reviews, etc.
 * Are the sources current?
 * It appears that the majority of the sources are current and within the past ten years except for some journals that I noticed were from 1996, 1987, etc., so I would assume those sources are outdated unless they just provided general information that does not change quickly as time progresses such as a definition.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * The sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors as some wrote journals, some systematic reviews, public health reports, and more. There does not appear to be a reoccurring author for many sources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * I checked a few links, and the ones that I checked worked properly.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is well-written in the way that it is concise and easy to understand because it covers the surface of many topics but does not dive super deep into multiple topics.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * The article did not have any grammatical or spelling errors that I noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is fairly well-organized, but I would have included economic impacts and social/personal impacts before I included information about nursing and epidemiology. It felt as though those topics were thrown in or out of place within the flow of the article.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article included no images that enhanced the understanding of the topic. They could have included images of those with chronic conditions and them managing them such as HIV, Alzheimer's, etc.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * There are no pictures to have captions.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * There are no images to adhere to regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * There are no images present.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are notes regarding including more diverse information from across the world rather than just the United States because obviously everywhere deals with chronic condition, not just the United States. It also discusses mistakes such as pregnancy being previously listed as a chronic condition.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as a C-Class and is under the scope of WikiProjects Medicine.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The Wiki article discusses economic impacts of chronic conditions while our course focuses on social/personal impacts of chronic conditions as well as how different cultures perceive them rather than primarily focusing on the United States like the article did.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's overall status is that it is a decent article but it could definitely be built upon in order to be better and more well-rounded, hence while it is Mid-Importance but only a C-Class.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article's strengths are hitting many aspects of chronic conditions and giving overviews of each subtopic. There also appears to be reliable sources, and no obvious grammatical or spelling errors.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be improved by elaborating more on certain topics so that each topic has equal information rather than some topics being information heavy while others are not at all. The article could also reorganize its categories so that the most important and relevant are towards the top and less relevant are moved to the bottom.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is a little underdeveloped because as I previously stated, some topics are information heavy while others barely have any information, so the article is not well-rounded in all of its subtopics of Chronic Conditions. If those topics were elaborated on and provided more information, then I think it would be a well-developed article.

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: