User:PaulaUPRC/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) Focal seizure
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I've chosen this article because it's classified as a C-class article. On another hand, it's a theme that I know a lot about and makes me what to be up to date with new research and information from theme.

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 a very good introductory sentence giving the definition of the theme that it's going to be talked about. The Lead doesn't include a brief description of the article's major sections what it does, it makes you understand the concept of what it's going to be talked about therefore you understand later on the different terms. In other words, it tells you about what a seizure is and why is it a complex event because of the different sections of the brain and its complexity. The Lead doesn't include any type of information that it's not presented in the article. The Lead is concise and has a very good introduction therefore you can understand what they will be talking about.

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

Content evaluation
The article's content is relevant to the topic. It gives a very good definition in the terms and also include symptoms the patient might be feeling. The content it's up-to-date due to the fact that this theme is always at a constant research, trying to learn more about the condition and its symptoms. There is an example of a simple partial seizure but there is no example of a complex partial seizure I would have given an example of a complex partial seizure and its background information as the one given for a simple partial seizure. The story does not address a topic related to historical underrepresented populations or topics.

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
The article is neutral. The article is made to attempt to persuade the reader in a way that is explaining and showing a certain type of seizure to the reader. I think that is the reader doesn't know anything about a parcial seizure they would learn and understand what a partial seizure is just by reading the article.

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?
 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
Not all the facts and information from this article have been backed up by a source. Not all the sources and references work now. some of them have been deleted or erased and doesn't let you give enter the site. On the other hand, many books have been used as resources in this article.

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
The article is concise, clear and easy to read. Its structure is very good and its very understandable. This is why they have broken it down into some sections to reflect and point out the major points of the topic that have been very well developed.

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
This article doesn't contain any type of images.

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 conversations that are going on behind the senes are that there should be more information of the different type of people who get this disease. This article is a part of 2 WikiProjects; WikiProject Epilepsy and WikiProject Medicine/ Neurology. This article is found in another WikiProjects such as; Neuroscience and Epilepsy.

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
I think the article might be improved by adding more types of seizures related to this condition. As well as explain how a seizure is formed and when it was discovered as its background history. The article's strength is simple partial seizures. We can also improve by telling what triggers this kinds of seizure therefore people might be able to be more cautious.

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: