User:Mgcorn5051/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Cetirizine - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am intending on going to pharmacy school, and so I thought this would be a good way to help introduce myself to some of the content. Additionally, I work in a local pharmacy, and several of our patients are prescribed cetirizine (Zyrtec) to help with allergies, a clear indicator on how important this drug is to its users. My preliminary impression of it was that nearly every other word/phrase was linked to an additional Wikipedia article, truly showcasing the wide yet detailed knowledge of the public.

Evaluate the article
LEAD SECTION: The lead section does include a clear and concise introductory sentence, describing the medication's drug class as well as its approved uses. The lead section also has a paragraph (or at least a sentence) describing the main takeaways from each section: medical uses, adverse effects, pharmacology, chemistry, and availability. The lead section is brief while still informative enough that a curious reader can gain a lot simply from reading the lead section alone.

CONTENT: All of the article's content is up-to-date and relevant, very much like a Lexi-Comp drug information sheet, but portraying the information in such a way that nearly any layperson can understand. If they don't, they are guided to additional Wikipedia pages for explanation.

TONE & BALANCE: This article has a neutral, scientific, informative voice. It is simply describing how a drug looks, what it does in detail, and how that could cause a variety of effects. The article is not trying to persuade the reader into taking or avoiding cetirizine.

SOURCES & REFERENCES: The majority of the cited content is between 2000 and 2024 (the most recent being the usage statistics of cetirizine as of January 2024), while a couple were from 1998 and 1999. These just detailed the initial research findings and the final patent application of cetirizine. There are some that provide more of a subjective, anecdotal voice in a couple areas of the article. However, they were typically in addition to other objective peer-reviewed research articles. The links that were tested do work.

ORGANIZATION & WRITING QUALITY: The article is neatly broken down and ordered in a good thought process, with no grammatical or spelling errors (not caught, at least). As mentioned earlier, this is a good introduction to cetirizine and its associated information.

IMAGES & MEDIA: There is the necessary image of cetirizine's structure, but it could have benefited from images/graphs that described cetirizine's mechanism of action, as well as dosage response curves.

TALK PAGE DISCUSSION: Majority of the "Talk" page conversations surround amazingly specific missing pieces of information (EX: including veterinary uses, clarification between inconsistent citations, comparison with levocetirizine, etc.) as well as critiquing the tone used in writing the article at various points of time. This article is rated "C-class" and is part of the following WikiProjects: Pharmacology, Chemicals, and Medicine.

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS: I think that this article is considerably well-developed, but I am also a student and have minimal knowledge. It was fascinating to read more expert views on the lacking pieces of information about cetirizine within the article. The article has a solid strength in its clarity and conciseness, a result of many reviewers. However, more and more of the population becomes visually-inclined when it comes to learning, so including representative images (potentially from the cited articles themselves, but that's just a hope) would be helpful.