User:SR5016/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article[edit]
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: (Simulated patient)
- The increased use of simulated patients in nursing and medicine education programs left me intrigued about the history of the use of simulated patients.
Lead[edit]
- Guiding questions
Good introductory sentence that provides brief overview of the topic and what is covered in the article.
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
Lead evaluation[edit]
Content[edit]
- Guiding questions
There are references from 2004-2004; however, also present are resources from 2015 and 2016.
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Is the content up-to-date?
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Content evaluation[edit]
Tone and Balance[edit]
- Guiding questions
The article provides many more advantages than limitations toward the use of SP; however, information does not seem persuaded toward one position.
- Is the article neutral?
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
Tone and balance evaluation[edit]
Sources and References[edit]
- Guiding questions
Many sources are outdated. Links to references are working.
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Are the sources current?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation[edit]
Organization[edit]
- Guiding questions
Appears well-writen and organized.
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Organization evaluation[edit]
Images and Media[edit]
- Guiding questions
No images present.
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Are images well-captioned?
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
Images and media evaluation[edit]
Checking the talk page[edit]
- Guiding questions
Talk section does not have much going on. Last update 2018. Rated B-class and low importance.
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Talk page evaluation[edit]
Overall impressions[edit]
- Guiding questions
Article is brief and thorough. Provides adequate information regarding history and advantages of the use of SP.
- What is the article's overall status?
- What are the article's strengths?
- How can the article be improved?
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
Overall evaluation[edit]
Optional activity[edit]
- Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback
with four tildes — ~~~~
- Link to feedback: