User:ScienceMClearner/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Richard H. Lawler

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I selected an article from the medicine Wikiproject and looked through the C-class articles. The article is a biography of a surgeon who took part in the first human transplant on record. My initial impression was that I found the page not quite complete mostly because of the featuring image on the top right of the page was missing captions.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section: The lead section is concise and right away presents the subject's major contribution in medicine, that is, surgeon part of the first kidney transplant.

Content: Overall the article contains the important information about the subjects career and life path in relation to his medical field. The career subsection is the most robust and the subjects tackled seem to be all over the place. There is no well established timeline. Does not deal with a wikipedia equity gap. The article might also be missing information on the subject's personal life.

Tone and Balance: The article is not completely neutral. The author uses terms such as "bold" or "famed" which indicates a slightly biased standpoint.

Sources and References: All links are working. Many of the sources come from news websites but there is a variety in the type of resources. The publication dates vary a lot.

Organization and Writing-quality: The organization is not quite well set but the subtitles do match with their content. There are no significant grammatical errors

Images: There is only one image of the article's subject. An image of the operating room were added would be a great addition

Talk Page Discussion: The article is C-class rated and is part of the medicine wikiproject. There is no discussion displayed Overall: The article's overall strength is quite weak and not enough developed because of the length and limited information. The article could need more content and images.