User:LL03251944/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Personality development disorder

Personality development disorder

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

i chose to evaluate this article because i find personality disorder’s interesting specifically when it comes to psychology and figuring out what it really means and the treatment. This matters because it’s a disorder many people suffer from, my impression of this article was confusing because there was many things i did not know.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The article does have an introductory sentence that describes the article it give a definition of the disorder .The Article does have a brief description of the disorder and the difference of a mental illness and disorder which many people believe it is a mental illness. the lead does not include information that is not present in the article. The lead is concise ,and does not overly go into detail and get off topic.

The article’s content is relevant to the topic the lead does not go off track, the lead focuses on the certain disorder and facts about it, additionally the content is up to date it was last edited on 21st of August of 2022. I don’t believe there is any content missing the lead organizes everything and talks about the treatment and causes and the definition of the disorder. the article addresses a topic that is not much talked about.

The article is neutral, there are no claims that are heavily biased towards a particular position, the article i would say is underrepresented in some points for example the description of the disorder is really short. The viewpoints in this article are described pretty vaguely, the lead does not try to persuade the reader to persuade in favor or against anything.

The article is backed up by secondary reliable citations they do reflect the literature off the topic ,The sources are not current.The sources are diverse by different authors. There are better sources for this topic disorder for example :https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/9636-personality-disorders-overview

https://www.apa.org/topics/personality-disorders/causes

The links do work and they have much more updated information.

The article is well written and organized it is very easy to read and understand, this article does not have any grammar errors or spelling errors, the article is broken down into sections and very organized.

The articles does not show any images that enhance the understanding of the topic.

There is not many conversations going on for this article there is just one signifying they have never heard of the disorder, the article is rated as low importance ,It is a part of the wikiprojects. The article differs from what we have talked bout because it is not controversial or arguing over one side in any way it’s mostly informative.

The article’s overall status is pretty good maybe some improvements need to be made and more information needs to be added, the article’s strengths are the introduction and the organization of the article. Some improvements would be adding more new information of the disorder and the causes. I would say the article is underdeveloped because it still needs some small citations and more information added to the article.