User:Zeribe.ezeanuna/sandbox

Article evaluation


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Yes everything is relevant.
 * Is there anything that distracted you? The section about veterinary medicine but its was not a distraction it more so stands out because I would not have thought of veterinary medicine and electronic medical records system.
 * Is any information out of date? From what I can see no.
 * Is anything missing that could be added? I believe there could be section pertaining to feedback from end users based on certain studies, statistical data derived or research conducted.
 * What else could be improved? I believe that the article itself could use a section pertaining to the overall success or failure of EMR/EHR in general after implementation based on certain studies, statistical data derived or research conducted
 * Is the article neutral? Yes, the article is very neutral in my opinion.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?No
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work?Yes
 * Does the source support the claims in the article?Yes
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Yes
 * Where does the information come from? Journal, Government Agencies, etc.
 * Are these neutral sources? Yes
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?The last discussions held were about patient access, merging information, contradicting statistics, quality control, etc.
 * How is the article rated? C
 * Is it a part of any WikiProjects?Yes (Medicine, Technology, Software, etc.)
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?N/A