User:Kayoff/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Psychogenic pain

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this topic because I found it interesting and thought it would be nice to research into it further. My first impression of the article was that the page was very short. When reading the article there was also not much information overall, so I thought that in choosing this topic, I could add to it and help create a more informative page.

Lead section

 * The lead does contain an introductory sentence that states the basic definition of the topic
 * because it is short, it does not highlight major sections
 * article is concise but mostly focuses on the definitions

Content

 * what is present is relevant to the article
 * there is a lack of information on the topic
 * does not explain outside of definitions (could view treatments, history, assessment tools)
 * felt that it could be more up-to-date based on sources and lack of information

Tone and Balance

 * The article has parts that are oddly worded which could affect the neutrality
 * Some sentences without direct citation could seem biased ("sufferers are often stigmatized...")
 * The view of emotional causes feel overrepresented compared to other potential psychological causes
 * The article does not argue for a side

Sources and References

 * All of the facts seemed to be backed by secondary sources
 * Most were internet dictionaries, making reliability difficult
 * The sources were not very thorough -- mostly gave baseline definition
 * Other than dictionaries, the most relevant source was 2010
 * It was difficult to distinguish diversity of authors because of lack of access to cited sources
 * Through searching there were few peer-reviewed articles that could serve as good citations (but some were not at recent)
 * The links to dictionaries worked, but citation to journals lacked links to follow

Organization and writing quality

 * The article is short but has choppy sentences that are hard to follow
 * The article is not organized -- all information in the article is place in small section

Images and Media

 * The article does not have any pictures or additional pieces of media
 * There is only a box that contains other names and the topic's category

Talk page discussion

 * There were no conversations on the talk page
 * The topic is rated as a start class and is apart of a wikiproject psychology

Overall impressions

 * Overall this article does not feel completed, in the way that it could expand on more information about different aspects of the topic. When reading, the information that was provided in the article felt repetitive since it did not go much deeper than definitions and examples of psychogenic pain. This article could be improved in many ways such as adding different sections with more information on the topic, editing some of the wording and sentence structure, and adding pictures of tables that can improve the overall look of the page. The article did do well in sticking to using sources that were secondary, but after researching, I felt that there could be better ones that provide more on topic, and are not just dictionaries and diagnostic tools. Although it could be because the article is rated as a start class, the overall impression is that it was not well developed and lacked further information.