User:NikkiLed/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) Occupational safety and health
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I choose this article, because I am interested in the safety and health of workers section of human resources management. Health and safety is very important in any occupation, as it is one of the main aspect of how a business should operate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead introduces the topic clearly and concise. The article gives a definition of what occupational health and safety right at the beginning. It generalizes the idea of the topic, but the sections further down go in more detail about occupational health and safety. There is a brief description about common law and statute law for the safety of the workers and that leads into a section about where it describes what employers should be doing to promote the safety of the the employees. It also goes includes a list of countries and their laws about Occupational Health and Safety. The Lead was short and simple, as everything that was mentioned was present throughout the article. In my opinion, I thought the Lead would have been more detailed, but it was able to get the point across about what occupational health and safety is.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content throughout the article is relevant to the topic. There is content about what occupational health and safety is, the safety in different occupations, the statistics of injuries, and how to identify health hazards. It has plenty of information about the health and safety in different countries and what their management system is called. It is up to date, as there is a section called contemporary developments. It talks about the pandemic of COVID-19 and the safety measures that are being taken. It does not go much into detail, as there is another separate article on it. In addition under that section, it goes into detail about new technology like artificial intelligence and nanotechnology. The new technologies are suppose to provide less risks for workers; however, they do produce other risks of their own. There is content missing throughout the article, as it does not talk about some general aspects like Workplace Hazardous Material Information System (WHMIS) and worker's compensation. The article did not talk about worker's compensation to the extent I thought it would. In addition, it does not include the other continents or countries and the professional roles they take part. In one of the sub-sections it only goes into detail about the U.S. and Europe professional roles and management. Also, it does not talk about workplace bullying, harassment, and mental health. All of these contents were underrepresented as they should have been part of the article.


 * 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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is neutral, as it states the facts about occupational health and safety. The article does lean more into educating about health and safety of the United States and Europe, as I stated before. The article goes into depth about the workplace fatality and injuries statistics, national legislation and organization, and professional roles and responsibilities for the United States and Europe. It does not really go into much detail about Asian countries, South America, Australia, etc. Every other place is underrepresented, even though some are mentioned in the article under national legislation and organization. The article claims that workplace death and injuries decline over the years. It also states that men have more deaths than women. It favors towards this opinion, because stereo-typically men work in high risk occupation. Although, in the health care sector it states that they have more injuries and illness and stereo-typically women work in this environment. The statistics are there, but there is no explanation to why these events are happening, even though it may be self-explanatory. The article does not persuade the reader, as it is an article about occupational health and safety. It just gives statistics about what occupation can cause the most death or injuries.


 * 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?

Sources and References
The article has a secondary source that is cited throughout the article, by almost every paragraph. The links in the article are easily available to access, as they direct you the source on the page. The sources are current, as new information was added in 2020 about COVID-19 and the health and safety of workers. Also, most information are linked to sources that are from the 2000's era. There are many sources in the article that have a diverse spectrum of authors. There is an author who is sourced in the article named Christina Lunner Colstrup who is Sweden who wrote an article in the Journal of Agromedicine. There are authors from Russia who wrote a book called Actual Problem of Occupational Medicine. This article contains may different authors throughout the world, as they all have information based on the topic of occupational health and safety. Although, there are reliable sources, there are some articles that go into opinions, which are not reliable. It is important when writing an article that information are factual based and not opinion based. For the most part, the article was sourced well and easy to access.
 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization
The article is easy to navigate through the table of contents. The article is well-written, as it has many sections that go into detail depending what the reader is trying to find about occupational health and safety. For example, there is a section that goes into occupational health and safety by industry. That section has another subsection in which there are different health and safety information depending on the occupation/industry. It is clear, as most of the context is written in simple sentences for the audience to understand. The article does not have any spelling errors, other than one word being spelled as "focussed" and not "focused". Although, that particular spelling is commonly used in the UK. It is also grammatically correct, as there is no questions wondering what the sentence before states. It is clear, as it gives the definitions of words that are cited in the article. That is useful for readers, as they do not have to search up the meaning, as it is readily available to click upon. Overall, the organization of the article is well-written, as it allows the reader to instantly understand the article with detail.
 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article does include images that enhance the topic of occupation health and safety. The images have short captions that allow the reader to understand what is happening. There is a variety of different images that correlate to the topic. For example, the article provides images of different types of safety materials, situations with no safety measures, advertisements for safety working, etc. They all fit well with article. All the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations, because they are cited. Some visuals are laid out nicely, as they are all on the right side and are a good size for the page. I think if some of the images were laid out on the left, it would be visually appearing. It would not just be context and then picture on the right side repeatedly throughout the article.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page
In the article there is not much conversations behind this topic. There is some input of adding Taiwan into sections and mentioning sanitation workers in the article to represent the topic. I think that not much conversations are happening, because it is a general topic. Many specifics could be answered through more detail on a different sub-topic article.The article is rated as B-class article. It is part of multiple WikiProjects like Wikiproject Disability, Law, Medicine, Occupations, Occupational Safety and Health, Health and fitness and scuba diving. I believe that the article got a B-class, because it provided the most of general idea, but it would not be the top pick. This topic is discussed differently than in class, because the article goes more into detail about the occupations and the international safety measures. In class, we talk about it in the general aspect like the health and safety through organizational culture. For instance, we talked about how employee engagement and management can tie into the health and safety of a company. In class, we also discussed about workplace violence, bullying, harassment and mental health. These topics were not mentioned through the article, as the article focuses solely on fatalities and physical injuries. I think that the article should mention those topics, as it is important for workers to have a safe and positive work environment.
 * 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?

Overall impressions
Overall, the article is a well-written article, as it contained plenty information about Occupational Health and Safety. The article has many strengths, as it was well organized throughout the page. The information was sectioned into different headings making it easy for the readers to find specific information. Some articles do not include images to help enhance the topic; however, this article showed a variety of different images. I think it could be improved by mentioning the general content of health and safety. For example, I think that It can be improved by adding more statistics about other countries and going into more detail about them. It can also be improved by adding more information about the different occupations safety. Also, using reliable sources could be improved upon. The article would be never fully complete, as new dangers from any occupation can approach at any time. It is important that this article is being constantly updated, as new safety measures may be put in place. However, the article currently is underdeveloped. It has both general and specific information, but are missing contents for both. Overall, I think that the status of a B-class article was correct as it was good, but still could improve on material.
 * 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?

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: