User:Nfaulk2/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Mushroom poisoning

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because of my interests in emergency toxicology and foraging. I'm specializing in Emergency Medicine and during my toxicology rotation, I encountered a few interesting cases of patients concerned about potential mushroom poisoning after foraging. As a person who enjoys foraging, this situation was relevant to me. When foraging, it's important to feel safe and confident in knowing what you are ingesting and it's potential toxicities. Many people, myself included, use the internet to reference this. Mushrooms are a commonly foraged organism that may present with many different toxicities, which is why I think this insuring the accuracy of this article is so important. My preliminary impression is that the article has important information (definition, signs/symptoms, treatment), but is missing information in the treatment/next steps area (where a person might refer to if they were concerned about poisoning).

Lead section
I think the lead section is good, includes a concise and clear definition of mushroom poisoning and overview with top general symptoms, that could be read quickly.


 * The lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic.
 * The lead includes a brief description of some but not all of the article's major sections (missing prognosis, treatment and society/culture).
 * The lead does not include information that is not present in the article.
 * It is concise and not overly detailed.

Content
I think this article covers most of the important aspects of a topic, however I think the prognosis and treatment section is neglected and missing information.


 * The article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * The content seems to be up-to-date.
 * This article is missing explanation of effects and prognosis of the most lethal mushrooms (which is listed but not explained). Diagnosis process as well as the prognosis and treatment for different groups is missing.
 * This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps nor address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics. However it could if it included culturally specific exposures to mushrooms.

Tone and Balance

 * This article remains neutral throughout.
 * No claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * I think viewpoints from other cultural practices from indigenous people and people outside of the US such as cooking, medicinal, and ceremonial practices
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * The article pulls from a diverse amount of reliable secondary sources including peer-reviewed publications.
 * Some language is questionable as it makes statements without specific reference to who makes the claim, ex: "once thought edible..." and "until recently thought edible and good..."
 * Not all facts have references specifically under "Poisonous mushrooms" heading.
 * Most of the sources are current however, missing the most up-to-date annual report from America's Poison Centers (currently citing 2022)
 * This article does not include historically marginalized individuals such as those from cultures with historical relationships with mushrooms.
 * Links work

Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * The article is concise, clear, and easy to read without any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * The article is not organized well, it is confusing to present the table of toxins under signs and symptoms with descriptions of effects/prognosis/treatment and then later explain poisonous mushrooms separately. But for the most part major sections are there.

Images and Media

 * The article includes images that enhance understanding of the topic, however given that mushrooms often look similar, I think more images would be helpful.
 * The images are well-captioned.
 * All images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations
 * The images are not laid out in the most visually appealing way.

Talk page discussion
The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * Discussions about how to have non-NPOV on mushroom poisoning. Another felt there was a number of information about mushrooms that this page could contain but could also be linked to other articles around mushrooms in general.
 * This article is rated as C-class, level 4 on content scale. It is a part of medicine toxicology and fungi WikiProjects.
 * In my toxicology course, we referred to guidelines created by the Illinois poison control center which had a different layout. Main sections in these guidelines were descriptions, symptoms, differential diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. There was also more discussion among effects and interactions.

Overall impressions

 * this article is a C-class and overall is a good article with important information on typical cases of mushroom toxicity.
 * This article is strong in it's presentation of toxic metabolites and their effects.
 * This article an be improved in its cultural context, and presentation of diagnosis and treatment.
 * I think the article is well-developed but there is room for more information.