User:Disco4321/Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

Lead
These are my 1-2 sentences I am drafting. I could not find what exactly was required to draft for that part.

Article Critique

 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Are some areas under- or over-developed?
 * The content is all relevant to the topic, though I could see an argument in combining the "Utility" and "Statistics" sections as I feel there's some overlap. Not sure if those are like the de-facto section names tho.
 * Is it written neutrally?
 * Despite how large the misunderstandings are over the test, it does seem quite neutral in tone.
 * Does each claim have a citation? Are the citations reliable?
 * Looks like each claim has a citation, although as the article goes on into the more conceptual parts of the MBTI, the citations become a little more sparse. Theres also a section with several [citation needed] markers around one particular area talking about the concepts
 * Does the article tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps (coverage of historically underrepresented or misrepresented populations or subjects)?
 * I don't think it tackles one of them, but I would also argue it doesn't need to tackle one of them, as the topic is a standardized test. I suppose it was made by two women, therefore talking about that covers a bit of the equity gap.
 * What can you add?
 * The only real edit my nervous and antisocial mind wants to maybeeee suggest is combining the "Utility" and "Statistics" sections due to subtopic overlap.