User:NicholasDeniro/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: Panic Disorder, (Panic disorder)
 * I've chosen this article because it is an important anxiety disorder.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The Lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. It provides summaries for each of the major sections and also includes an information hub on the side that displays most of this information as well. It does not include information not present in the article, and it is concise while still providing a general description of all of the major factors and related topics in regards to the disorder.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The article does a good job of only including information that is pertinent to the topic and largely avoids including information that is not. There is not any content that appears missing or that does not belong. Content is up-to-date and reflects consensus research and opinion in regards to treatment, symptoms, and causes of panic disorders. It very lightly touches on distribution of the disorder worldwide, and fails to provide research about how panic disorders affect marginalized groups.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article does a good job of remaining neutral and not being biased towards any particular position. It does not attempt to persuade the reader to take any particular stance on panic disorders, and in general represents multiple viewpoints fairly, including CBT, Psychotherapy, and Medication.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The sources in general are mostly primary sources discussing their own research into specific topics regarding panic disorders. They are, however, thorough and broadly reflect available and widely cited literature on the topic. Many of them are not current, however, with almost all of them being published over 5 years ago. While it is tough to gather the status of many individuals responsible for the sources, in general it appears that they are relatively diverse, and links work and correctly link back to their states articles.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
It is very well-written, with concise language that does not venture into very academical waters and is easy to understand. It doesn't have any grammatical or spelling errors, and the sections are all self-relevant and reflect important points.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
While there are only two images in the article, both of them are well-captioned, do not break copyright regulations, and enhance the reader's understanding of the article

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
A lot of the talk in regards to this article is over a decade old, and they mainly discuss removing or adding information that is more pertinent to panic attacks in specific rather than panic disorder. It is in the Psychology and Medicine WikiProjects, and receives a B-class rating.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
Overall, this article could use more research in regards to how panic disorders affect and are seen in marginalized communities, but overall it comes across as a clear, informative, and easy-to-understand article about an important topic.

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: