User:Storo23/sandbox

/sandbox

Article in review: Military medical ethics

Evaluating content


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article    topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * The article presents the subject in a concise yet,     clear manner in its introduction. It includes relevant wiki links to the      medical ethics and the applied ethics articles which are useful for      readers to obtain a better background of the topic. Nevertheless, the      article is lacking substantial information. Its Historical background section      presents two examples on why the branch of military medical ethics emerged,      however it does not elaborate on their relevance making them seem      disconnected from the topic.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing    that could be added?
 * Although no information is out of date, it does not cite     any references in the historical background section. The article should      include a greater number of citations to support its statements. At the      moment, it somewhat seems as if the author came to the conclusion that      the radiation experiments taking place in the Cold War could have      possibly given rise to military medical ethics. A clearer connection to      its reference section is needed to expand on this subject.
 * What else could be improved?
 * Apart from its use of references and citation, the     article is too vague to truly gauge a good understanding on the      differences between regular medical ethics and military medical ethics. A      section detailing the specific differences and more elaboration on the controversies      fueling the creation of a separate set of ethics for the military could      be improved as well.

Evaluating tone

·       Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

o  The article preserves a neutral tone and focuses on informing the reader about the subject. It does not lean towards a particular viewpoint and briefly expresses how differences exists between regular medical ethics and military medical ethics without favoring one or the other.

·       Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

o  There is a slight overrepresentation on the controversial aspects that arise in military medical ethics and how the background for its creation arose from problematic circumstance. Although the article requires elaboration on the subject overall, it should place an equal emphasis on both the controversies and the factual differences between the regular and the military side of medical ethics.

Evaluating sources

·       Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

o  Most links provided in the reference section appear to be properly functioning some appear to have privacy connection errors while others lack a hyperlink to click on. The last three references also lack mentioning the book pages used to create the article. Apart from these concerns, all links relate to the topic and appear to come from legitimate, official sources.

·       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?

o  In addition to the the lack of factual support on the article, there could also be an improvement in its use of citations. While all references seem reliable, certain information in the article lacks specificity as to where it came from. The references themselves mainly come from military medicine textbooks and medical journals.

Checking the talk page

·       What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

o  The talk page shows not conversations. No other contributions seem to have been made on the article.

·       How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

o  The article is a C-class article as it is lacking certain criterions to be considered a B-class article. It’s topic is of interest to three different WikiProjects yet, it appears to not be a part of any of them.

·       How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

o  Unlike the class layout, where a topic is analyzed under two viewpoints, the article presents the information in a plain, fact centered manner. Such lack of diversity in perspectives could also be attributed to the fact that it lacks substantial information on the topic. Perhaps a good addition to the article could be the dilemmas arising between the medical community and the military when devising the guidelines for medical military ethics that military physicians should follow. The article could also expand on examples where the specific military ethical principles were placed into practice and how well they were handled. Although the subject does not lend itself for a debate-like discussion, it could be assisted by the inclusion of multiple, unbiased, perspectives on the subjects.