User:Mcwiki42/Graphomania/123-se Peer Review

This article does a great up with it's topic sentence and leading the reader into it's topic. It provides a specific and in depth definition of Graphomania. There is no brief description of the article's major sections. If the article wanted major sections, it could label the first part the "Psychiatric Definition" and then label the next section something else (I can't think of a topic sentence) but something about a definition outside the psychiatric definition. And then maybe even splitting up the sections between Kundera's definition and Milosz' definition?

This article does a great job incorporating citations. The article does not feel opinion based and that increases the articles credibility.

The article includes information on terms that are related to Graphomania which is helpful for further research.

I noticed a bit of passive voice in this article and think that active voice would make it sound more professional. - "in a context much different..." to "in a different context..."

Overall, great job! I don't have much suggestions besides specific line edits which I didnt read through the whole things so this is all I have :).

Specific edits:

- "When used in a specific psychiatric context, it labels a morbid mental condition which results in writing rambling and confused statements, often degenerating into a meaningless succession of words or even nonsense then called graphorrhea." I feel like this sentence could be broken up because it is slightly hard to follow.

- "gaining the term more traction.." This is a small edit, there are two periods at the end of this.

- "typomania, which is obsessiveness with seeing one's name in publication or with writing for being published, excessive symbolism or typology." -"typomania, an obsession with seeing one's name in published writing, excessive symbolism, or typology."

- "Anyone gripped in the claws of dialectics [the philosophy of dialectical materialism] is forced to admit that the thinking of private philosophers, unsupported by citations [failing to regurgigate Stalinist propaganda], is sheer nonsense." Regurgigate is spelt wrong? ... I think?

- Under the See Also section, add periods at the end of those definitions.

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)