User:Meganvanderwiele/Evaluate an Article

There seems to be a gap between the history of neurodiversity and its application to current advocacy movements. The extensive history lesson guided me away form the actual idea and science of neurodiversity. It seems to be lacking fist-hand experience with neurodiversity.

The article does seem to maintain a neutral tone. The "controversy" section allows for the reader to see what opinions are commonly discussed and argued within the realm of neurodiversity.

The links for citations work. Some citations seem to be biased news articles from opinion sources in online newspapers such as the New York Times and The Washington Post. Other sources are more credible and from scientific papers. There is a mix between opinion and science, but since the topic of "Neurodiversity in the Media" is extensively referenced in the article, the nod to media sources is explained.

The article is rated C-class and is part of the psychology, medicine, disability, autism, and dyslexia projects. The talk page is filled with discussions about whether topics that are already extensively covered in their own Wikipedia pages deserve a section in the Neurodiversity section. It is also filled with bold claims about Neurodiversity as a movement versus Neurodiversity itself.