User:Rksheikh/sandbox

Article Evaluation: Complex post-traumatic stress disorder

1. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? This article was well-structured and progressed from point to point smoothly. The article begins by defining C-PTSD and then providing a brief history and introduction of the disorder. The article then describes symptoms in children, followed by symptoms in adults. Following symptoms of C-PTSD, the article describes several differential diagnoses for C-PTSD. Finally, the article describes treatments of C-PTSD for children and ends with C-PTSD treatments for adults.

2. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article has a neutral tone and does not immediately appear to be biased. The article addresses both perspectives on the exclusion of C-PTSD from the APA DSM-5.

3. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The article does a good job of remaining unbiased and neutral. Consequently, viewpoints and specific topics are described equally.

4. Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The citations from the article are functional and support the claims made by the article.

5. 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? Facts are referenced with appropriate and reliable references. The majority of citations come from peer-reviewed articles from established trauma journals or journals of psychological health.

6. Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? Numerous citations from the article are from before the year 2000. More than 10 of the articles 44 citations were published in 1999 or before. Finding more recent citations with the same information would strengthen the article.

7. 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? Primarily, conversations on the Talk page are related to potential edits to the current version of the article. These edits range from corrections to citations, to suggestions for possible additions to the article. One large conversation regarded the exclusion of C-PTSD from the DSM-5 and the validity of the article given the controversy within the field of psychology.

8. How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? WikiProject Physiology:(Rated B-class, Mid-importance), WikiProject Psychology:(Rated B-class,Mid-importance), WikiProject Medicine(Rated B-class, Mid-importance).

9. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The article discusses C-PTSD and describes it more in-depth than we have in class. Additionally, the article discusses the role of attachment and attachment disruption plays in C-PTSD, a perspective we have not yet considered in class.