User:Ca$hley/Evaluate an Article
 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.
Sources and ReferencesA Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved. |
Which article are you evaluating?[edit]
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?[edit]
I chose this article as I have done extensive research on the controversy surrounding DID as a diagnosis. Misconceptions surrounding Dissociative Disorders have led to increased stigma and barriers to treatment for those with DID.
Evaluate the article[edit]
Lead Section: Needs a brief overview of following sections.
Content: Content is related to the topic of the article. Some information is not accurate/up to date: hypnosis is not often used in modern psychological treatment. There is information pertaining to cultural differences and perspectives. New brain-imaging studies should be mentioned, which provide physiological evidence for the existence of dissociative disorders.
Tone and Balance: Tone appears neutral and provides a balance of opinions.
Sources and References: Many sources are missing. For instance, there is no source cited for the Treatment of DID section.
Organization and Writing Quality: The organization could be improved. For instance, moving the diagnosis/prevalence section above causes and treatments would help the article flow better.
Images and Media: Images, especially if brain-imaging studies are added, would help to visualize differences in brain structure and function for those with Dissociative Disorders.
Talk Page Discussion: There are discussions surrounding this article, it is rated high-importance for neuroscience, and it is a part of a WikiProject.
Overall Impressions: This article is a great start, and with collaboration/work to provide more up-to-date and accurate information as well as sources it could be very useful for those attempting to understand dissociative disorders.