gh-sawyer-middeleer-dot-claude-plugins-dot-claude/skills/analyzing-source/templates/article-summary.md

created, source_url, source_type, research_focus, tags

created	source_url	source_type	research_focus	tags
YYYY-MM-DD	URL or citation	academic/industry/community/expert/case-study/documentation	the specific research angle this source addresses	research-topic relevant-tags

[Source Title]

Source: [source_url]

Citation

[Full citation information - include authors, date, publication, DOI/URL]

Executive Summary

[2-3 paragraph overview of what this source is about, its main contribution, and why it matters to the research. Should be comprehensive enough to understand the source's value without reading further.]

Key Concepts & Definitions

[Define important terms, frameworks, or concepts introduced or used by this source. Be specific and thorough.]

• [Concept 1]: [Definition and explanation]
• [Concept 2]: [Definition and explanation]
• [Concept 3]: [Definition and explanation]

Main Arguments / Insights / Features

[Break down the source's central arguments, insights, or technical features in detail. Use hierarchical structure if there are multiple levels.]

Primary Argument / Insight / Feature 1

...

Primary Argument / Insight / Feature 2

...

Primary Argument / Insight / Feature 3

...

Methodology / Approach

[Detailed description of methods, technical approaches, research design, or execution strategies used]

Specific Examples & Case Studies

[Concrete examples, case studies, scenarios, or demonstrations provided in the source. Include specific details, numbers, and context.]

Notable Quotes

[Include verbatim quotes that capture key ideas, unique insights, or particularly well-articulated points. Be generous with quotes - they're valuable for synthesis.]

Evidence Quality Assessment

Strength of Evidence: [Strong/Moderate/Weak]

Evidence Types Present:

• Empirical data / statistics
• Case studies / real-world examples
• Expert testimony / citations
• Theoretical reasoning
• Anecdotal evidence

Credibility Indicators:

• Author/Source Authority: [Assessment of author expertise and source reputation]
• Currency: [How recent/up-to-date is this information?]
• Transparency: [Are methods, sources, and limitations clearly stated?]
• Peer Review/Validation: [Has this been peer-reviewed or validated by others?]

Critical Evaluation

Strengths: ...

Limitations: ...

Potential Biases: ...

Relevance to Research Focus

Primary Research Angle(s) Addressed: [Which specific research angle(s) from the plan does this inform?]

Specific Contributions to Research:

[How specifically does this advance understanding of each angle 1?] [What unique perspective or information does this provide?]

Gaps This Source Fills: [What questions does this answer that other sources haven't?]

Gaps Still Remaining: [What questions does this source raise but not answer?]

Practical Implications

[What are the practical takeaways, recommendations, or applications discussed?]

• [Implication 1]
• [Implication 2]
• [Implication 3]

Open Questions & Further Research Directions

[What questions does this source raise? What further research does it suggest?]

1. [Question/direction 1]
2. [Question/direction 2]
3. [Question/direction 3]