User:Pearsonn2/Evaluate an Article

~

Which article are you evaluating?
Autism

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because I have several loved ones, who fall on the autism spectrum. It is important to me that this page uses accurate, person-first language.

Lead Section

 * This article's lead includes an introductory sentence, which concisely and clearly describes Autism.
 * The lead includes a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * The lead only includes information present in the article.
 * The lead is concise, given the myriad of information on this topic.

Content

 * The article's content is relevant to Autism. It provides a general overview of Autism, characteristics of it, necessary for recognition, diagnostic processes, and information on social movements for people with Autism.
 * The content is somewhat up-to-date in terms of defining both the genetic and societal predictors for Autism. However, it does not always use person-first language, and it references obsolete concepts, like Asperger's, which is no longer a diagnosis (https://www.autism-society.org/what-is/aspergers-syndrome/), and thus is not updated in accordance to the DSM-5 criteria.
 * Out-dated content, like the reference of Asperger's syndrome, does not belong. For balance, successful employment opportunities should be added.
 * The article deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, in that it addresses topics related to the historically underrepresented populations of people with disabilities.

Tone and Balance

 * While the article is neutral, it appears to include only the negative aspects of Autism, failing to portray the skills that are unique to many people with Autism.
 * There are not any claims in this article that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * The viewpoint of people with Autism as struggling and limited is overrepresented in this article. "High Functioning Autism" is not a legitimate diagnosis, and mentions of it should be removed.
 * Minority viewpoints, like those with tentative evidence, are accurately portrayed as such, except in circumstances, where undiagnosable language, like "high functioning" and "Asperger's" are included as diagnoses.
 * While the article may not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from the other, its employment statistics, with failure to relay success statistics, and limiting symptoms of Autism, with failure to mention the unique, favorable resulting attributes, move to scare the reader, without room for comforting them.

Sources and References

 * The facts in the article are backed up by a secondary source of information.
 * The sources are thorough, in that they reflect available literature; however, several of the in-text citations are other Wikipedia pages, which is not ideal.
 * Some of the sources are up to date, but the earliest sources were published in the early 1900s. Information from the DSM5 and diagnostic criteria are not up to date.
 * Sources appear to be written by a diverse spectrum of authors. I am uncertain if said authors include historically underrepresented populations or topics.
 * Better sources, including the DSM-5, are available.
 * The few links I checked, including "toe walking", work.

Organization and Writing Quality

 * The article is relatively concise and clear.
 * Aside from the neglect to use first-person language, there are no clear spelling or grammatical errors.
 * The article is well organized.

Images and Media

 * The article includes a few images and media, but authors could select images, which better convey the main points of the article.
 * Aside from not using person-first language, the images and media are well-captioned.
 * The images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright guidelines.
 * The images are laid out in a visually-appealing way, but they could benefit from being larger.

Talk Page Discussion

 * Behind the scenes, in regards to representing this topic, discussions are being held on the validity of listing Asperger's syndrome and the potentiality of the link between mercury and Autism.
 * This article is rated as a C-class article. It is a Former Featured article. This article is a part of WikiProjects WikiProject Medicine, WikiProject Neuroscience, WikiProject Psychology, WikiProject Disability, WikiProject Autism, and WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.


 * I am unsure of the question being asked in the final bullet point of this section, as I do not believe we have talked about Autism in class.

Overall Impressions

 * The article's overall status is a Former Featured, C-class article.
 * The articles strengths are its comprehensive touch on subtopics, its plethora of contributors, who view updating the article with high importance, and its commitment to providing accurate information.
 * The article could be improved by enlarging images, updating diagnostic information, in accordance with the DSM-5, and using person-first language.
 * This article was likely once well-developed, but is currently under-developed and could improve from modern modifications and conciseness of less relevant subtopics.