Talk:Addictive personality/GA3

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Delldot (talk · contribs) 06:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your hard work improving this article. Unfortunately, it doesn't meet the GA criteria at this time so I'm going to have to fail it. But if you're interested in working on the article at any point, whether with a view toward GA or not, I'm happy to help however I can. I'm going to go into more depth about why I'm failing it below, and if you need any further explanation about anything definitely let me know and I'd be happy to provide it.


 * The lead section does not effectively summarize the article. All topics addressed in the article need to be summarized in the lead (e.g. the causes). But what we have so far is good!


 * Avoid weasel wording like "Some people believe" and "Some advocate for the existence of…"


 * Is this correct? Coke is not an opiate: if one twin is addicted to cocaine, the other twin has an increased likelihood of being addicted to an opiate.


 * Explain unusual terms in the text so people with no special knowledge can understand. e.g. "neurotransmitter", "external locus of control", "field dependence",  "primary and secondary neuroses"


 * Organization
 * The article needs better organization, e.g. the signs and symptoms section has multiple paragraphs that talk about stress, depression, and social insecurity, all mixed together. Better to have a paragraph about each.
 * Also, in the signs and symptoms section, there are sentences that belong in other sections and repeat stuff that's there, e.g. Both the addict's environment, genetics and biological tendency contribute to their addiction.
 * the section Personality traits and addiction begins defining addiction and introducing the topic way down in the middle of the article. This needs to happen closer to the beginning.


 * the article often fails to differentiate between addictive personality and addiction. e.g. the list of different addictions has tenuous claim to belonging in the article, it's not clear how these are different than the addictions themselves. For example, Technological advancements reinforce the over-attachment people have to their cell phones, thus contributing to addictive personality.  Why would this contribute to the personality, rather than to the addiction itself?   Some of the subsections merely talk about the addiction itself, and make no mention of personality.  Same problem with the treatment section: it talks about how to treat addictions, not the personality.


 * Is this a disorder? I see APD in the article.  If it's listed, that should be mentioned.

Again, thanks for the work improving the article so far, let me know if you need any help or anything or if you have any questions. Please don't nominate this again without addressing the concerns here or in the other two GA nominations. delldot  &nabla;.  06:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)