User:Jamie Kerby/Evaluate an Article Foundations of Clinical Psychology

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (Child abuse)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it's rated as a "C" and it relates to what I am interested in doing for my career.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The Lead's introductory sentence clearly defines and describes the article's topic. The Lead is concise and includes a description of some of the article's major sections, but not all of them. There is nothing in the Lead that is not present in the article. There is a clear table of contents present.

Content

 * Guiding questions

Content evaluation
 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics

The article's content is relevant to the topic. I'm not sure how scientific the History section is, but there are many citations listed. Most of the references range from the 1990's to 2013. The article covers a wide range of topics and most sections have a sufficient amount of information in them. It also briefly discusses different forms of abuse in different countries. They did not mention school-based programs as a treatment method for child maltreatment, so I added in two sentences briefly mentioning it. I also added in a sentence mentioning that 18 states require mandated reporters to

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article overall is neutral. There are a few sentences where it seems biased, such as when it referred to cultural differences a few times. I think it did a good job of explaining multiple viewpoints among researchers and professionals. However in the physical punishment section, they only discussed one viewpoint (that of Alice Miller) and then dropped the subject without exploring other viewpoints. This could have negative implications for those who do not agree with her stance and could be interpreted as trying to sway someone's stance.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The sources were somewhat current. I don't think a lot of the information was outdated though. There is a wide range of authors and source types although I'm not sure how I feel about their heavy emphasis of what happened in the 1800's in the History section and citing sources from so long ago. I tested link to different Wiki pages and references and they all worked. I would say it was a thorough article because I was not expecting them to cover the diverse range of topics they covered.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is easy to read (non-emotionally anyway). I didn't see any spelling or grammatical errors. The article was well organized and easy to jump to different sections. I might have organized it a little differently, such as combining the prevalences, effects, etc., underneath each abuse type section (e.g. Physical abuse definition -> causes -> prevalence....).

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
Most of the images had citations and links to the original source. The images were captioned and easy to read. The images did not appear to be placed in an odd section or place. The images relating to school or general corporal punishment in the U.S. had links with no citations.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page revealed that the article was not in the interest of any WikiProjects, but it was in the interest of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. The article was given a "C" rating. The talk page had a discussion of adding Online abuse into the article, such as catfishing, chatrooms, and webcam abuse. The sources cited for this topic were recent (2018). Another user asked for a sentient editor to overlook for orphaned references. It is unclear what the result of this request was.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article had a lot of information and covered a diverse range of topics. The information was kind of general and vague, which helps give information to various regions. I also liked that they attempted to add in some information from other countries around the world. Personally, I would shorten the history section because i don't know how relevant it is for most people. I would like to see more specific laws and policies across different states because that could be helpful for a lot of people. They need to either add in a citation for one of their photos or take it off the article. The article does not seem complete yet, and it probably won't ever be as technology continues to provide new ways for people to abuse children.
 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?