User:Romilp/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: Discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I am interested in the history/prevalence of HIV/AIDS and the associated stigma. I also feel there are certain cultural and socioconomic connotations that are linked with HIV/AIDS, and I'd also like to explore treatment disparities.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Fairly concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Relatively up to date, the last update was made in October 2019
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There should be some content that relates to socioeconomic factors that make it difficult to seek treatment, such as the disproportional costs of anti-viral therapy.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * 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? No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned? No images
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Some discussions on potentially adding more info to the wiki article. The last post was October 2016.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Wikipedia recommends that the article needs updating. It is part of WikiProject Aids, Sociology and Discrimination
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The article doesn't really get into the details of HIV discrimination and the hardships faced by HIV/AIDS individuals.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article really needs updating. There are new topics in the field of HIV/AIDS that needs to be added into the article.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article has a strong lead/introduction section that lays out the foundation for the article and highlights important points.
 * How can the article be improved? The article can be improved by adding sources that relate to the costly pharmaceuticals and the disparities in treatment faced by many marginalized groups.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article, as of now, is underdeveloped.

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: