Write an article based on this summary:

Begin with an introduction that outlines your argument. Provide evidence for your argument in the body paragraphs of your critique. Complicate your argument near the end of the critique. Present your arguments in a well-reasoned, objective tone. Conclude your critique by summarizing your argument and suggesting potential implications.

Article:
The introduction should be no more than two paragraphs long and should lay out the basic framework for your critique. Start off by noting where the article in question fails or succeeds most dramatically and why.  Be sure to include the name of the author, article title, the journal or publication the article appeared in, the publication date, and a statement about the focus and/or thesis of the article in your introductory paragraph(s). The introduction is not the place to provide evidence for your opinions. Your evidence will go in the body paragraphs of your critique. Be bold in your introductory assertions and make your purpose clear right off the bat. Skirting around or not fully committing to an argument lessens your credibility. Each body paragraph should detail a new idea or further expand your argument in a new direction.  Begin each body paragraph with a topic sentence that summarizes the content of the paragraph to come. Don't feel like you have to condense the entire paragraph into the topic sentence, however. This is purely a place to transition into a new or somehow different idea. End each body paragraph with a transitional sentence that hints at, though does not explicitly state, the content of the paragraph coming next. For example, you might write, "While John Doe shows that the number of cases of childhood obesity is rising at a remarkable rate in the U.S., there are instances of dropping obesity rates in some American cities." Your next paragraph would then provide specific examples of these anomalous cities that you just claimed exist. No matter how solid your argument is, there is always at least one dramatic way in which you can provide a final twist or take your argument one step further and suggest possible implications. Do this in the final body paragraph before your conclusion to leave the reader with a final, memorable argument. You might, for instance, utilize a counterargument, in which you anticipate a critique of your critique and reaffirm your position.  Use phrases like “Admittedly,” “It is true that,” or “One might object here” to identify the counterargument.  Then, answer these possible counters and turn back to your strengthened argument with “but,” “yet,” or “nevertheless.” Avoid writing in an overzealous or obnoxiously passionate tone, as doing so can be a turn-off to many readers. Let your passion shine through in your ability to do thorough research and articulate yourself effectively. While writing “This piece of garbage is an insult to historians everywhere” might garner attention, “This article falls short of the standards for scholarship in this area of historical study” is more likely to be taken seriously by readers. It is important to provide a recap of your main points throughout the article, but you also need to tell the reader what your critique means for the discipline at large.  Are there broad implications for the field of study being assessed, or does your critique simply attempt to debunk the messy work of another scholar? Do your best to make a lasting mark on the reader in the conclusion by using assertive language to demonstrate the importance of your work:  “Challenging the claims of such a distinguished scholar is no easy or enjoyable task, but it is a task we all must agree to do for our generation and those to follow.”