User:MRH2002!/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Breastfeeding difficulties

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I wanted to pick an article surrounding women health and thought this would be interesting. I believe a lot of people aren't aware of the problems that can occur during breastfeeding of the mother and baby. I thought the article was very informational and was well referenced.

Evaluate the article

 * Lead section
 * I feel that the first sentence sounded a little off, they could've worded it better.
 * The introduction didn't include all of the major topics of the article. It mentioned difficulties which we know already but it didn't mention anything about transmission of substances, diet, or workplace which were the last 3 topics of the article.
 * The lead could use a bit more detail. The second sentence was too long and should've been separated.
 * Content
 * The content is relevant but some was unnecessary. The list of things that interfere with breastfeeding was too long, it could've been shortened. They added extra information in the list also that could've been its own separate paragraph or not been added at all.
 * In the breastfeeding problems section, the topics breast pain and overactive let down could've been excluded or added to the list at the beginning since they used so little information.
 * The cannabis topic within the Transmission of drugs and toxins section could've been removed because the information was irrelevant.
 * The diet section could've used more information. It addressed healthy lifestyle and diet but didn't provide further information on how these things are good for a breast feeding mother. It also spoke about a malnourished mother but didn't provide more detail about how this can effect the baby or the mother.
 * Tone and balance
 * The tone was neutral.
 * The engorgement topic was too wordy and made the article look off balance since the rest of the topic sections were much shorter.
 * Sources and references
 * There was a large range of sources with a variety of authors and the links I checked all worked. The sources I looked into provided relevant information of the topic and showed little to no bias.
 * The milk stasis topic could've used some citations.
 * In the workplaces section there was no citation for the last sentence which was a quote, I suggest adding a citation or removing it.
 * A few of the sources were old coming from earlier than 1990. I suggest using more up to date information.
 * Organization and writing quality
 * The article was organized well with separate sections and topics within those sections.
 * A few of the sentences didn't make much sense because of the way they were worded.
 * Images
 * There were two images provided that were relevant to the text.
 * Talk page and overall impressions
 * In the talk page there were conversations about the title, sourcing being added to content, links being modified, and information generally being changed around.
 * My overall impression was that this was a good article but some of the wording could be changed around and the balance could be a little better.
 * The information provided was relevant but it could use more in some sections. I believe it is underdeveloped.