User:Olupesko-persky/sandbox

Article Evaluation Assignment:

Article: Complex post-traumatic stress disorder, Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_post-traumatic_stress_disorder

•	Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? While the theme is quite generic and hence allows for the author to add many sub-issues, which the author does quite well, several themes described in the article were not directly related to the subject at-hand. For example, describing ‘developmental trauma disorder’ under children and adolescent sub-chapter was going beyond the scope of the article. •	Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article appears to be neutral overall, as it discusses broad spectrum of causes of, symptoms and treatment methods for C-PTSD. However, there is a slight inclination in the article to attribute C-PTSD to parental behavior (as opposed to war, bullying, etc.), without providing substantial research to support such position. •	Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? In the section of Symptoms, children and adolescents, the author relies on one source in particular (Childress, 2015) to describe C-PTSD among children. This could be problematic as the author tries to argue that PTSD does not fully convey the delicate relationship between trauma and child’s development. •	Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Overall, there are approximately 40 sources, and the links themselves work. •	Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? The references appear to be appropriate and reliable based on the following: -	Published in recognized and well-established journals/magazines/publications: Journal of clinical psychiatry, Journal of traumatic stress, American Journal of psychiatry, et. -	Articles from past three decades (from 1987 onwards) -	Sources appear to be neutral based on titles (does not provide position), type of journals. •	Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? Most of the articles are from between 2000 and 2010 which suggest that the focus was on PTSD as defined in DSM-IV. However, in the past five years PTSD in its new formation under the DSM-V has been through significant revisions. Those are not addressed in the article, and hence some of the information may be out of date. The article would have benefited from a review of vulnerable populations to be diagnosed with C-PTSD, and not merely divide populations into children/adolescents and adults. For example, would army veterans be more vulnerable to develop C-PTSD, or would victims of war would be more vulnerable? •	Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Review of the Talk page suggests there is significant ‘back and forth’ about the article, with several reservations and discussions. For example, one participant expressed concern that there is too much of an emphasis on interpersonal relationships as the cause of C-PTSD. Others suggest that the discussion on C-PTSD is quite futile as it is not likely to find its way to DSM-V (the reviews were from 2011). •	How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated B-Class, mid-importance. It is part of WikiProjects Physiology, Psychology and Medicine. •	How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? While we have not discussed complex PTSD in class, some of the aspects discussed in the article are similar to those discussed in class. For example: treatment methods for certain traumas, symptoms, etc.