User:Red027/sandbox

Article Evaluation
It is important when evaluating an article to check for reliable sources. There are indicators that an article may not accurately represent the topic. While doing this module, I noticed that there were many suggestions that are instrumental to editing a Wikipedia article. These are options that I see featured on Wikipedia pages all the time. They are consistent, and speak to the trustworthiness of the process of editing.

For the article evaluation, I reviewed the topic Acute stress disorder. The article touches on a variety of subjects with the topic. However, the area addressing causes is lacking. There is only brief mention of theories, but no information beyond that. The section dedicated to history has some good information, but could be expanded. There are links to other relevant topics. The pathophysiology section is the longest. The article is listed as being a part of a series on emotions. The article has many references listed. These references are from journals.

Was any of the information you read in the Acute Stress Disorder article biased? What type of references were listed (e.g., primary or secondary sources)? Liz

Potential Sources

 * Acute Stress Disorder review
 * Treatment Meta-Analysis