User:Aford4706/Schizotypal personality disorder/Emiell490 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Aford4706


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aford4706/Schizotypal_personality_disorder?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)Schizotypal personality disorder
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)Schizotypal personality disorder

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Lead

- the lead into the article has not been updated yet by the editor, however it is a good lead if left untouched.

Content

- Content in the article and added is relevant to the topic

- Several, more up-to-date content was added by the editor on the topic. It improves the article tremendously and gives a better understanding of the article's topic.

- More was added to the "history" section in bold that gives a better understanding the schizotypal personality disorder. However, the history section is still severely lacking. If possible, I would go in and add a lot more to this section.

- under "diagnosis", the editor marked out some symptoms that may no longer be the most appropriate symptoms to describe for this disorder. This is a great job on the editor's part. I would encourage it if any more outdated content is found within the article. It is great improvement.

- under the "treatment" section and under the medication section of treatment, the last sentence of the first paragraph feels random. Consider adding it when the article begins talking about antidepressants, or connecting more relevant information to lead into talking about olanzapine. At the end, the use of stimulants is talked about. Consider adding in some more information or examples on how stimulants are used to help with this disorder.

- under "epidemiology", some unnecessary wording is marked out by the editor on a sentence about adolescent cannabis use. This makes the information clear and concise, and easy to read and understand. I would encourage continuing that with any other sentences found to have unnecessary wording or information.

Tone & Balance

- Everything in the article edits is neutral. There is no influence towards certain sides.

Sources and References

- all look correct and links work.

Organization

- the content is very well organized aside from minor changes listed in the content section.

Overall impression

- The edits so far in this article are great. You are catching edits that need to be made that aren't exactly obvious, such as searching for and adding more up to date content. Keep up the good thinking and work!