User:Krishgopalan/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: Healthcare in India
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: In this article, both my area and sector are covered in some level of detail. The scope of my organization's work falls within this article and the research I have done clearly ties into the sections discussed.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The Lead includes an introductory sentence that describes the view of the government towards the healthcare system in India. The Lead includes a general overview of the current healthcare system in India, which serves as background for the sections covered. It would be helpful to add a more generalized summary of what exactly is covered, such as a basic introduction to the subsections covered and the content contained therein.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The article's content is relevant to the topics contained within the subsection. It appears to be somewhat up-to-date, with the latest entries comin from 2017. However, we see that much of the content tends to lose focus about the main topics, opting rather to talk about differences in particulars. Thus, rather than providing an overview of the topic, most of the content heavily involves various case studies. This makes it hard for general information to be found. The most recent programs relating to the healthcare system in India, specifically current events, seem to be ignored.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
While the article appears somewhat neutral in regards to its overall structure, within certain subsections, we see certain views being favored over others. For example, within the public-private partnership section, we see a wholly positive viewpoint of the partnerships. No criticism is present even though the idea of public-private partnerships within academia is highly contested.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
While the facts in the article are all cited by reliable sources, it seems that many subheadings rely heavily on one source. This prevents the focus of the articles from being balanced: rather, it skews the results towards the conclusion of one author. The sources are both thorough and recent and are representative of the literature about the topic. Most of the links that I clicked were functional, leading to the appropriate sources. The only issue seems to be a shortage of sources from different viewpoints.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
In terms of organization, the article is well-organized. There aren't any observable spelling errors. In some portions of the article, there are a few unclear sentences that can be made more concise by changing verb tense and shortening summary sentences. Overall though, the breakdown seems to be organized in a logical manner.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There are a few images that are scattered across the article. They are captioned. Most of them refer to hospitals and their relative locations. However, these images, while being of medical facilities, do not seem to add any content substantial to discussions. In terms of placement, some are well placed, but others seem extraneous. Images are somewhat visually appealing and seem to adhere to Wikipedia copyright regulations.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The page remains somewhat stagnant currently. The latest discussions have had to do more with reorganizing the article and less on the restructuring of content. The article is rated C-class. In terms of wiki projects, it is in WikiProjects India, WikiProjects Medicine, and WikiProjects Hospitals. There hasn't been a lot of discussion in this article in the past two years, so I'm not quite certain the nuances of discussions that are being had. However, the community seems supportive in regards to editing.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
Overall, the article is organized in a logical manner and has appropriate sources. However, it appears to be biased due to the fact that not enough sources are used. The article contains a lot of material to work from, but using more critical approaches could help its objectivity and scope. The article is somewhat developed, ut seems incomplete in terms of current content. Further edits could be done to assist with clarity.