Talk:Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test

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 ----JamesSugrono^U|C 15:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

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.----JamesSugrono^U|C 12:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, instead of deleting it, ill move it to the section called contreversy.----JamesSugrono^U|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)

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. ----JamesSugrono^U|C 15:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

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)

Citations notice

Do we think this is still relevant?

"This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2008)"

I've dug up a few articles from sources other than ACER to verify a few points. Rpi15 (talk) 15:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Undergraduate Medicine and Health Sciences Admission Test. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160417014932/http://health.adelaide.edu.au/downloads/future-students/admissions/umat-info-session.pdf to http://health.adelaide.edu.au/downloads/future-students/admissions/umat-info-session.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130721034214/http://umat.acer.edu.au/files/UMAT_info_book_13.pdf to http://umat.acer.edu.au/files/UMAT_info_book_13.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:32, 9 September 2017 (UTC)