User:E3B21/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Addictive personality - Wikipedia)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I find the topic interesting. When viewing the C-class articles, this one stuck out to me the most.

Evaluate the article
The lead section provides a solid, concise overview of the subject. It isn't overly detailed and serves as a basis for what readers might expect in the content but doesn't give the game away too quickly. The writing is relevant to the topic, but the progression isn't that logical. For instance, food addiction is brought up right away, while the actual definition for "addiction" comes later. Before diving into factors that might contribute to addiction, it makes more sense to first introduce the subject of addiction. The article also doesn't seem to be up to date, as the latest reference is a few years old. Other users noted in the Talk section that the citations weren't reliable, but it appears now that they've been updated. I would suggest that edits be made to establish more credibility; there's not a lot of "according to" language, so it's more difficult to believe regardless of the citation at the end of the sentence. The tone is neutral, and the writer(s) address different angles while providing useful examples. The article is written fairly well. For some, it might be a bit confusing, as the language at times is unnecessarily complex. There are some grammatical errors, and at times the bridge between sections feels a bit off. The formatting could be a bit better. Adding in some visual elements might bring the article to life more. It looks as if the article hasn't officially been recognized as a good article, but it has been nominated for that status in the past. Overall, the writing is decent and detailed, but the content would benefit from some reorganization and some in depth fact checking. The sources require reevaluation as well. It has a way to go, but it's not a bad place to start.