User:Juliric33!/new sandbox

1. What stub did you choose? Why did you choose this one? Copy and past the URL link into your Sandbox

-The first stub I chose was called Multimedia Psychotherapy. I thought this would be an interesting article to read about since I've never heard of multimedia psychotherapy. Multimedia_psychotherapy

2. How do you know that it's a stub: Identify where on the page that you know that this is a stub

-At the bottom of the article it says "This mental-health related article is a stub".

3. What are some missing or under-developed parts of this stub? A good way to determine this is to compare your stub to a more developed article on the same topic and category. So for example, if you chose a stub-article on a horror novel, look for another Wikipedia article on another horror novel that is more fully developed. What is missing on your stub page in comparison? You should devote 4-5 sentences to answering this question.

-The main thing the stub goes over is the process of multimedia psychotherapy. There's about one to two sentences that talk about the founder of this process and why it was created. I think that there should be more information about the founder as well as the effects this process has on people. When talking about mental health and different forms of therapy it is important to give as much information about the process as possible so people can be informed about the effects, purpose, history of this therapy.

4. In particular, locate the "References" section of the stub. What, if anything, is listed in the references? If the references are hyperlinked, do the links still work?

-There were two references and one of them was a film review and the other reference was a from a journal of psychiatric practice. There was one link in the references section and the link did work and brought me to the website.

5. And, when you compare this stub to a well developed article of the same category type, what sections of the overall article are present, and what are missing?

-I looked up cognitive behavioral therapy since it's in a similar category as multimedia psychotherapy. Looking through the article I saw that there were at least seven categories discussing the overall topic. The article really went in depth about this type of therapy and this stub is missing a lot of that. The stub doesn't go into detail about it's medical uses, history, criticisms, etc.

1. What stub did you choose? Why did you choose this one? Copy and past the URL link into your Sandbox

-The next article I chose was Rational Behavior Therapy. I chose this because psychology and mental health is not only something that I've always been interested in but psychology is also my major so the more I read and know the more knowledge I have. Rational_behavior_therapy

2. How do you know that it's a stub: Identify where on the page that you know that this is a stub

-At the bottom of the page it says "This mental health-related article is a stub".

3. What are some missing or under-developed parts of this stub? A good way to determine this is to compare your stub to a more developed article on the same topic and category. So for example, if you chose a stub-article on a horror novel, look for another Wikipedia article on another horror novel that is more fully developed. What is missing on your stub page in comparison? You should devote 4-5 sentences to answering this question.

-Kind of like the last stub there aren't many categories within the article. There's only a general description of what Rational Behavior Therapy is and the history behind it. There needs to be more information like the uses for this therapy medically, if there were any studies done using this therapy, criticisms this therapy might get as well as if this therapy actually improves peoples health. It's very important to have as much information as possible when talking about peoples health.

4. In particular, locate the "References" section of the stub. What, if anything, is listed in the references? If the references are hyperlinked, do the links still work?

-Two of the references are from websites and the other two are from books. The links for the websites do work.

5. And, when you compare this stub to a well developed article of the same category type, what sections of the overall article are present, and what are missing?

-When I compared this article to another one in a similar category, I noticed it was well organized and had main sections as well as sub categories within it. The article would list as much information as possible.

1. What stub did you choose? Why did you choose this one? Copy and past the URL link into your Sandbox

-The last stub article I looked at was about Ephialtes. I chose this article just because the name sounded interesting so I wanted to see what it was. Ephialtes_(illness)

2. How do you know that it's a stub: Identify where on the page that you know that this is a stub

-Like the last two articles, at the bottom of the article is says "This mental health-related article is a stub".

3. What are some missing or under-developed parts of this stub? A good way to determine this is to compare your stub to a more developed article on the same topic and category. So for example, if you chose a stub-article on a horror novel, look for another Wikipedia article on another horror novel that is more fully developed. What is missing on your stub page in comparison? You should devote 4-5 sentences to answering this question.

-This article is missing a lot of information. The only information that the stub contained was the definition of this illness and where it came from. I read that this illness is similar to sleep paralysis so I feel like there should be a section about it within the stub. There's a "See Also" section which has a link to sleep paralysis but I think it would be important to include it. I also think there should be a section to see if any studies were done on this illness, more statistics about how many people it effects, how people can cope with this illness, etc.

4. In particular, locate the "References" section of the stub. What, if anything, is listed in the references? If the references are hyperlinked, do the links still work?

-There are three references in this stub. The links work and they're from different websites. One of the sources doesn't necessarily look very reliable so I think there should be a bigger search for reliable sources.

5. And, when you compare this stub to a well developed article of the same category type, what sections of the overall article are present, and what are missing?

-I clicked on the sleep paralysis article and it had so much more information and was organized. It talked about signs and symptoms, diagnosis, prevention, treatment, society and culture, etc. The stub about Ephialtes was lacking in a lot of those categories and I think with some hard research this could potentially become a good article.