User:Mrj0915/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Abnormal psychology
 * I have chose this article because it is the focus of the class we are in and I have other information to use to check to see if the information is correct.

Lead

 * Yes the article lead included an introductory sentence which is very clear and straight to the point. It does not have a brief description of the major sections but it has a content page that includes all the sub topics and their sub topics. The lead includes all the information that is present in the article and the lead is concise.

Content

 * Yes the articles content is all relevant to the topic such as "history" and "cause" topic sections and was updated August 31st, 2020. There is no content missing and everything belongs.  It talks very little about minorities and not at all about African Americans.

Tone and Balance

 * The article appears to be neutral and no claims that appear to be heavily biased. There doesn't appear to be any viewpoints that are either overrepresented or underrepresented. The article talks about a variety of viewpoints such as different psychologists and their theories and it does not seem to persuade the reader in one position.

Sources and References

 * The facts appear to be backed up by reliable secondary sources are there are 39 notes with resources listed with five resources and five external links and the sources are thorough. There are a good mix of sources dated back from 1930 all the way to 2016 and there are a quite few amount from the 2000's. There is a diverse spectrum of authors which do talk about other minorities and African Americans in their studies.  I clicked on a few links and they did work.

Organization

 * The article is well written, concise and clear. It is easy to follow along as a beginner.  It appears the article does not have any spelling errors or grammatical errors. The article is well organized and broken down into their topics such as "history," approaches," and "classifications."

Images and Media

 * The article does not include any images.

Checking the talk page

 * It seems behind the scenes that there was some spelling errors fixed, adding in some links and rephrasing. The article was rated a C on the quality scale and a high on the importance scale and it is apart of WikiProjects for Psychology.  It seems that Wikipedia talks about abnormal psychology the same way we have so far, at least in the same order of starting with the history.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * I think the articles overall status would be a B. I think they have included a lot of helpful information and it is well organized and broken up into good sub topics.  Some other strengths would be that is very clear and easy to follow and that all the links work and they appear to be reliable sources.  Some weakness would include to try to go more into detail on their cause section because I didn't find much information there.  I think the article is well developed and has appeared to have come along way from the beginning.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: