Talk:Family resilience

Article Evaluation from college student for class
Evaluate an article: Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? I find the lead to be very helpful if building off of the major section of family psychology and expanding the article with a good example through this military family topic, as an example.

The section of this article is short but to the point.

Is the content up-to-date? Yes, as far as I know. Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Somewhat, the section is based off of information from 10 years ago.

Is the article neutral? Yes Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not really, all I would say is that resilience seems to be heavily represented by the term/ability of coping. (Maybe there is a better way? I don’t know.) Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes Are the sources current? Somewhat, there might not be more recent research done in order to be more current. Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

No pictures used in the article.

Nothing really mentioned in the talk page of the article.

The article’s overall status good The article is very concise and provides good examples and links. The article could be expanded or updated with current research less than 10 years old.

Nicholasemmett123 (talk) 04:38, 16 October 2019 (UTC)