User:Rachelhoegeman/sandbox

I'm not sure I'm doing this right

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_vein_thrombosis
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything is relevant to the topic and is very informative. There is nothing distracting about this article. It is even helpful that there are pictures.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article is free from bias. It is all based on facts, and all the sources seem to be reliable.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, it is just an informative article.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? The links work, and there is no hint of bias in the article.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? I personally think that the article is full of important information related to the topic. It doesn't appear that any information is out of date.

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There are conversations about adding different topics to the article but I feel like it covered enough.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as a good article. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It actually is quite similar related to what we talked about in class. It sets up what nurses would need to know about DVT to help treat their patients. I enjoyed this article.

3. Pulmonary Embolism Pulmonary embolism
I am interested in these topics and I will continue my search for what can be improved in these articles. I will use the wiki-talk page to help me do this. I decided to do topic number one. My edit consisted of talking about post-thrombotic syndrome. Post-thrombotic syndrome is another complication of DVT. It can affect about a one-half of people diagnosed with DVT (Kvamme & Costanzo, 2015). The article talks about post-thrombotic syndrome, but it doesn't state the prevalence of it happening to about 50% of patients who have DVT. I added my content to the article and cited it.

Source: Kvamme, A. M., & Costanzo, C. (2015). Preventing progression of post-thrombotic syndrome for patients post-deep vein thrombosis. Medsurg Nursing, 24(1), 27-34. Retrieved fromhttp://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.gvsu.edu/docview/1655503161?accountid=39473

Reflective Essay
During the Wikipedia evaluation and the article critique we did in class I learned so much. I'm glad I have this base for the future because it made me critically look at articles and ask myself questions. Before this class I had no idea how to critique an article or what to even look for. Now I know what to look for and see what is missing from an article. I'm not great at it yet, but it will take practice. I decided to look at deep vein thrombosis because the topic interests me, and we learned about it in my theory class.

As a student, I contributed a different eye towards the Wikipedia article I made an addition to. I took what I've learned in class and asked myself, "what is this article missing?" Since I had some background information about the subject from class it wasn't too hard to decide what I should add. I believe that my edits were valuable because they reflected information from a student nurse. It's awesome that Wikipedia allows people to edit articles and add information when they believe the article could gain something from it.

In general, the Wikipedia assignments were interesting. It was something I've never done before. It was kind of hard to adjust to the format and way that Wikipedia is set up, but I did the best I could. I learned that anyone can contribute to articles if they have verifiable evidence to back up their statements, and they go with what the article is saying. Wikipedia is nothing like I have done in the past so it made it a bit challenging. It was nice that we had learning modules throughout the course. The modules made things a little easier, but some things were still vague. Wikipedia can be used to improve understanding of a topic because it really makes you think. You have to take a look at an article and ask what is missing from this that could help someone understand. What is confusing within the article? What could be improved or stated different in the article? While looking at articles, it is important for people to want to contribute to Wikipedia to think about these questions. Although these questions are important, it is also important to have knowledge on the topic that you want to edit. If you are knowledgeable on the topic, the questions I stated below will be easier to answer and there's a better chance your contribution will uphold forever. In nursing research class it is important for nursing students to critically think about articles. This assignment helped us all do that.