Talk:Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Please do not add uncited statements. I am going to go throuh the article, and place {fact} tags on some statements. Please soruce them. Also, please take note of further improvements that can be made, such as WP:NPOV. Thanks See below ----JamesSugronoU|C 15:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] the second paragraph
Asks a question to the reader. Is this appropriate for an encyclopedia? I believe that we musr rephrase it, so i'll remove it, since it does not seem of encylcopedic value. If you would like to re-publish it, please rephrase it, as I don't believe I can do it. Here is the original paragraph:
The test sparks controversy both regarding its application and student preparation. No individual not a member of ACER is exposed to the marking methodologies or scaling measures undertaken. This instigates the obvious question regarding fairness. How can equity be guaranteed? This is a test deciding the future doctors of the nation.
As you can see, it does not read objectively for the encyclopedia, and it assumes that readers are Australian or New Zealanders. If you would like to re-publish the issue, rephrase it.----JamesSugronoU|C 12:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, instead of deleting it, ill move it to the section called contreversy.----JamesSugronoU|C 12:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- rm "This instigates the obvious question regarding fairness. How can equity be guaranteed? This is a test deciding the future doctors of the nation.". It does not add anything to the article and removes from the neutrality of the article. See (Let the facts speak for themselves). Thanks, Monkeyblue 11:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Issues
This article is almost definitely POV. IT is highly critical of The UMAT, and is in urgent need of a revision to most of its content. It must either show a viewpoint which supports the UMAT, or else be made completely neutral. Additionally, I'm not sure where this controversy is coming from, so it need s a source. And finally, since the only sources are primary, we need something reliable, such as a tabloid article, or something similar. ----JamesSugronoU|C 15:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Authenticity of sources
Hi, I note that you cite comments from medical and dental people about the quality of the ICARUS UMAT course but these comments are all taken from ICARUS' own web-site. Did you check whether these are real comments from real people? Also, who and what is ICARUS? Chrissie56 (talk) 23:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC) Yes they were checked with Australian experts quoted and are all legitimate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.232.6 (talk) 13:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
