User:Aramirez182/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Separation anxiety in dogs
 * Article Evaluation
 * I believe that overall, the article leaves out various key details that are important to maintaining Wikipedia's policies on quality. Regarding sources, some of the sources listed are from first-hand sources such as blog posts that are not reputable nor scientific.
 * The article is written neutrally, with no real argument or persuasion tactics being used. Information is presented as objectively as possible.
 * Each claim does not have a citation, such as "A visit to the veterinarian is always recommended if a dog's behavior changes suddenly." which can be found in the Lead.
 * The citations in the article are somewhat reliable. While some citations reference reputable sources such as National Animal Organizations which rely on a variety of studies to gain information, other sources are less reliable since they are from less reputable blog posts as well as from studies where the authors were actually researchers presenting on their findings.
 * The article does not tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects) since the article makes no mention to any human populations or subjects.
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 2

 * Death anxiety (psychology)
 * Article Evaluation
 * The article's content is relevant to the topic, however, it is not always balanced nor does each bullet point/subtopic match in terms of structure. For example, in the "Types" section, each of the three different types varies in terms of size as well as structure. Additionally, the last type, "Existential" gets a short historical lesson, while the other types do not.
 * I do not believe that the article is written neutrally since certain subtopics receive more attention than others and certain psychologists, particularly Freud, is mentioned more than any other psychologist, even though any ONE psychologist's views should not be included, rather a collection or review of psychologists' findings should be included instead.
 * Each claim does NOT have a citation.
 * The citations are somewhat reliable. While some citations are from national/scientific organizations, others are from specific/singular references and people such as psychological studies. Some citations do not even work, such as citation #7.
 * I believe that the article somewhat tackles one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects) by discussing death anxiety felt in children as well as religious individuals, who are to demographics of people who wouldn't normally be considered as populations that are affected by death anxiety
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 3

 * Test Anxiety
 * Article Evaluation
 * The article's content is mostly relevant to the topic. However, there are certain points where the article seems to address GENERAL anxiety rather than specifically test anxiety.
 * I believe that the article is mostly neutral, with the main issue being regarding the lack of information for treatment. The section regarding treatment is not as in-depth as other sections, whereas other sections have a good amount of cited information for causes and paradigms, treatment receives a small amount of information that does not address issues presented in previous sections.
 * Each claim does have a citation, however, not all citations are reliable, per wikipedia's standards on quality. For example, source #53 is from one specific person - Cecilia Downs - and in her website, she does not make any references to research or previously conducted studies.
 * The article does NOT tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects).
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources