User:Madnel4/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Behavioral addiction

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 this article because I took a class on behavioral addiction last semester and was really fascinated by the topic and its development over time.

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.)

There is an introductory sentence that defines the article’s topic but the lead does not include a brief description of the article’s major sections. The lead does include information that is not present in the article, “the term’s connotation has been expanded to include behaviors that may lead to a reward since the 1990s”. The lead is concise but could benefit from adding some detail to give insight into the different sections.

The content of the article is relevant and up to date. I do think some additional content would benefit the article such as the similarities and differences between substance addiction and behavioral addiction as well as impulse control disorders and behavioral addiction. I do think addiction is a historically underrepresented topic that has started to gain more recognition and continues to develop.

The article is neutral and there do not seem to be any biased claims. Despite the other smaller sections with less content, there is a large section dedicated to biomolecular mechanisms. The other sections could use some more in depth information such as that demonstrated in that section. The article does not use persuasive language.

The information in the article comes from sources that appear thorough and current. The sources are scholarly and the links that I checked did work.

The article is organized, well-written and does not contain grammatical or spelling errors.

There are not images included in the article.

The talk page includes discussions of consistency of terms, lack of clarity and miscommunication, neutral point of view. There is one discussion point at the end that questions whether addiction exists. There are not any responses to it but I do think it is odd as well as unsigned.

The article overall contains relevant and accurate information regarding the topic. It provides great detail in certain sections but could use more in other sections. I do think it is underdeveloped and would benefit from more information than it currently contains. It is not poorly developed and what is there has been done well.