User:Eresha8/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Hypnotherapy

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
While I was working through academic disciplines Wikipedia page that was offered in the instructions, I stumbled across this article. Although it was not one of the preapproved articles, it caught my interest. Hypnosis has always been something that I've been interested in. A few years ago at an event there was a hypnotizer and my friends and I decided to volunteer. When we did, most of us were successfully hypnotized, but not all of us. It was a surreal experience that sticks out in my memory. When I saw this article about how hypnosis could be used as a form of therapy I was interested.

I think it is important to explore different alternatives to medicine and conventional therapy. For many people, they cannot find relief in conventional methods, or are unwilling/unable to try them. In those cases, it is important to still have scientifically backed methods. This ensures that alternatives are not a waste of time or money and are effective.

My impression of hypnotherapy mainly stems from my experience with hypnosis that I detailed above. I imagined that it could be a form of therapy that some find to be successful, while it does not help others. Similar to how some of my friends could be hypnotized, while others couldn't. I had not read any experiments that included hypnotherapy or evidence for its efficacy, which was another reason why I wanted to use this as an opportunity to learn more.

Evaluate the article
This article's lead section clearly defined the topic, but it did nothing more than that. I believe that the lead section could use a bit of teasing out. This could be achieved by briefly discussing– or even mentioning– the different types of hypnotherapy or what it is usually used to treat, as both of these things are discussed in more detail later in the article. The conciseness of the lead section would not be lost by adding a bit more detail of what to expect in the rest of the article.

Nothing discussed in the article felt out of place or irrelevant. The content also seems to be up to date with the more recent sources dating back only to 2021. This article did a great job of keeping a neutral tone and did not display any overt biases. It was also well written with no grammatical errors, very concise writing, and clear organization. However, there were no pictures at all in this article, which can make the formatting feel dull, and therefore a bit boring to read. I think adding in just a related image or two would really help to make visuals of the article more exciting and engaging. Most of the links embedded in the article work, but there is one that no longer exists and needs to be removed. This link is located in the Occupational accreditation section under Australia.

The main issue I see with this article is a lack of content. The article is very brief, and I believe one way it could improve is to further develop exactly how hypnotherapy is used in each different definition– make sure each section has a clear operational definition. Another issue is that, although this article addresses many different types of hypnotherapy, all of the examples are from a predominantly white perspective. I think adding in some discussion about other culture’s use of hypnotherapy– such as how it was used by Native American healers– would round this article out more.

This article draws from many different sources, and all the facts addressed are cited, but I feel there is a lack of culturally diverse sources or even articles that discuss hypnotherapy across cultures. This could be easily remedied. Literature that at least highlights different cultures approaches to hypnotherapy do exist, and their addition to the article would be beneficial. Furthermore, the talk page on this article felt very dry, with only one brief conversation over the quality of a source, which was quickly reconciled. I think getting more activity on the talk page could help further develop the article, as having more eyes and hands engaged in it can offer new perspectives and ideas.

This article is a part of three different WikiProjects: WikiProject Psychology, WikiProject Skepticism, and WikiProject Alternative Medicine. Each of these rated the article as Start-Class, with Mid or Low importance. Although the writing of this article is clear and concise I feel that it is still underdeveloped. An increase in details and perspectives could really bring up the quality of this article. Overall, it is a good and well written starting point, it just needs to be added to.