User:Ryleatrudeau/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Stem cell controversy


 * Article Evaluation
 * Though I know that it is suggested to stay away from controversial topics, I believe that this Wikipedia page, which provides a brief overview about a specific controversy, could greatly benefit from further editing. This is the article that I used for my assignment last week, "Evaluating an Article", and as I claimed there, it is clearly not finished. There are several areas that could improve, including:
 * Better explanation of the controversy as a whole
 * Re-wording of statements that do not necessarily sound neutral
 * Addition of photographs
 * Brief explanations - or at least linking to other Wikipedia articles that provide explanations - about some of the concepts that go into stem cell opinions
 * Fact-checking the statements that were made (the article was produced by another class project at Dusquene University in 2015)


 * Sources
 * https://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/1.htm for background information
 * https://www.researchamerica.org/advocacy-action/issues-researchamerica-advocates/stem-cell-research for updating information about policy and to give page statistical measures of where our nation stands on the issue
 * https://www.pewforum.org/2008/07/17/stem-cell-research-at-the-crossroads-of-religion-and-politics/ to expand on the "viewpoints" section, referring to many religious viewpoints

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Medical ethics


 * Article Evaluation
 * Upon finding this article, I immediately noticed that it is marked as having "multiple issues" by Wikipedia. Though the topic of medical ethics certainly has many controversial subjects buried within it, it appears that this page is to discuss the concept of only medical ethics as a whole, so I believe that it would be safe to edit.
 * Necessarily improvements that currently stand out:
 * Information and citations added to the "informed consent" section to better elaborate and substantiate information
 * Additional category to incorporate many modern-day practices that are issues of medical ethics (gene editing, etc.)
 * Addition of photographs
 * Expansion of "Conflicts" section - to include conflicts of interest (discussed later in article)/rearrangement of information
 * Tie into how medical ethics are treated as a subject of education; medical schools today


 * Sources
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27333063 to discuss ways in which medical ethics are taught in schools
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5980471/ to elaborate on informed consent and add citations (article mentions that there is a lack of)

Option 3

 * Article title Eugenics in the United States
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article seems to have all of the right pieces, but needs some work with citations. After viewing the "Talk" page, I see that others agree - it is concerning that some of the information is being presented as a "fact" (even though the vast majority of people do believe that eugenics is wrong).
 * It would also be beneficial to add a section about the implications that eugenics have had on medical practices that we currently have in place (such as gene editing) and the public opinion about them.
 * Sources
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4135459/ to explain the concept of "human enhancement" which is done through modern day medical techniques that may resemble eugenics to many
 * Sources
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4135459/ to explain the concept of "human enhancement" which is done through modern day medical techniques that may resemble eugenics to many

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources