User:Vandkate/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Forensic pathology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because I have a great interest in forensic pathology. We have not discussed it in great detail in classes yet, however, a lot of the seminars I have listened to throughout classes this year have involved many aspects of pathology that I found very interesting. It seems like a perfect article for me to continue to learn and grow my knowledge on the topic. I would like to help in growing this article and ensuring that any readers are getting accurate information that improves their understanding and does not appear misleading, solely being fact-based and in a neutral tone that is answering questions they are looking to know.

Evaluate the article
The lead section does discuss important details regarding this topic, but it does not properly articulate a variety of aspects that could be interpreted incorrectly. It does contain an introductory sentence that clearly describes what forensic pathology is. It does state briefly what the major sections of the article will be. It however doesn’t capture the duties in the introduction but that follows right after. It mentions examinations and how it is used in criminal and civil law, however only briefly discussed later in the investigation of death section. It also introduces coroners and how they are responsible for the medical examination for identifying remains which are later talked about throughout the article. I would not say this section is overly detailed. It is very brief. The content written about in the article is relevant to the topic and the profession. From my research, it does seem to be up to date. It does miss technical aspects that are currently being performed, however, for example, virtual examinations. I would say all of the material covered in the article relates to forensic pathology, I also think there is room to add more information about some topics. The tone and balance of the article do remain and there are no claims that appear to be biased. I don’t think any viewpoints are overrepresented, however, I do think when it comes to the salary section, this could be elaborated to contain more than just states in the United States. The source and references are up to date and contain a variety of different authors and research. The organization and writing quality could be improved and grammar errors could be looked over and fixed. That being said the information is presented in a concise manner and the article is organized well, into sections that make sense and organize article to make it flow nicely. The images and media do not help to enhance understanding of the topic, they seem to just be visuals related to death, and there aren’t many visuals throughout however they are captioned adequately. The talk page discussion shows that the article is part of two WikiProjects, WikiProject Medicine, and WikiProject Death. The discussion includes a slight conversation about the information and relevance of the article and the topic. However, it does seem to include many younger individuals who are asking questions about forensic pathology and who to become a pathologist so this may have been a contributing factor as to the creation of the sections of the education needed and salary. My overall impression of the article is that it has good groundwork and does relay accurate and relevant information regarding the topic of forensic pathology, including the duties of a pathologist, history, information in regards to death investigations as well as information about corners. However, I do think there is room to improve that article in many ways. For example, by adding more education requirements for listed and non-listed countries, as well as adding to the salary section so it doesn’t only pertain to the USA. Information could also be added in regard to virtual examinations potentially. When it comes to the actual writing, words and phrases could be changed so that they represent the facts of forensic pathology rather than appear as an opinion or lead to misinterpretations.

Which article are you evaluating?
Forensic dentistry

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because I find forensic odontology very fascinating and have thought of going into the field of dentistry and odontology myself. I find it very interesting that so many details can be determined by the analysis and documentation of teeth. I have done my own research on forensic dentistry, more in the aspect of human identification based on radiograph comparison which really sparked my interest even further in the field. This article seems like a great way to research more into forensic dentistry and gives me a way to grow my knowledge and interests in the topic. Hopefully, my research can feed my interest in the topic further as well as help others who are viewing the article to find accurate and reliable information they are seeking.

Evaluate the article
The lead section does discuss the important details regarding forensic dentistry. the introduction contains a detailed summary of aspects of forensic dentistry, it states briefly the major components of forensic dentistry and further goes into training, background, high-profile criminal cases, the organizations and bite mark analysis, etc. The content written throughout the article is all relevant to the topic of forensic dentistry. From my research so far, it is to date. I think a section on how human identifications can be performed could be added since the article already discusses sex and age determination. The tone and balance of the article are neutral and do not appear to contain biased thoughts. I don't think any viewpoints are overrepresented, I think that training information could be added to the section about Canada and other countries could be added as well. The source and references are up to date and contain many different authors and research which represents the topic well. The organization and writing quality could be improved and grammar errors could be fixed. Information is presented in a concise manner and the article is organized well and flows well. The images and media are little to none, one picture does show the examination however there isn't much of a caption to help explain what is really happening. More photos may be a good idea for more visual representations. The talk page discussion asks some questions on clarity regarding bite mark evidence for example and if it's accepted in court, this is a good idea to potentially add. There is also a comment of confusion regarding human identification and bite mark analysis so maybe clearing up and altering bite mark analysis needs to be done, as well as the section on identification. My overall impression of the article is that it does explain maybe aspects of forensic dentistry that are relayed accurately and it is all relevant information on the topic. Room for improvement and additional information is present including some clarification on bite mark analysis potentially, human identification and potentially the addition of images and media would be beneficial to improve this article.