User:SocialAttractionStudent1/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Rejection Mindset
 * Article Evaluation
 * General
 * No current article exists detailing rejection mindset within online dating (and how it could possibly extend to in-person dating - like speed-dating). However, there do exist articles that describe the general principles at the heart of rejection mindset, including Overchoice and expectation confirmation theory. As such, if creating an entirely new article on rejection mindset is not approved, adding to choice overload in the context of online dating would be my second option.
 * Note: Here I evaluate Overchoice
 * Lead section
 * The lead sentence was very descriptive and concise; however, nowhere in the rest of the introduction is there a reference to the main sections of the article. All information in the lead, though, is expanded upon throughout the article.
 * Content
 * The content is all relevant to the topic, but I believe it is not up to date with more current examples of choice overload. It does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.
 * Tone and Balance
 * The article remains mostly neutral in its explanations of this impairment, with no heavy bias towards supporting or refuting research done around the topic, with no over/under-representation of viewpoints.
 * Sources and References
 * All facts are backed up and sourced contemporarily and well. Links work.
 * Organization and writing quality
 * The article is concise to read without any problems in grammar, spelling, or organization.
 * Images and Media
 * The article does not include image to enhance understanding.
 * Talk page discussion
 * The talk page 2 years ago was looking to include a section about replicacy of experiments done to prove the existence of the psychological phenomenon. The article is rated Start-class, Low/Mid-importance and is in WikiProject Business, Home Living, Marketing & Advertising, Media, Psychology, Retailing, and Sociology. There is no differences in the way Wikipedia discusses the topic as compared to class.
 * Overall impressions
 * The article looks to have a really great basic framework, strengthened by the detail and attention put in each section. It can be improved by adding specific examples of this coming into play. The article is well-developed but could use some more work.
 * Sources
 * All of my sources are primary/secondary articles
 * The article does not include image to enhance understanding.
 * Talk page discussion
 * The talk page 2 years ago was looking to include a section about replicacy of experiments done to prove the existence of the psychological phenomenon. The article is rated Start-class, Low/Mid-importance and is in WikiProject Business, Home Living, Marketing & Advertising, Media, Psychology, Retailing, and Sociology. There is no differences in the way Wikipedia discusses the topic as compared to class.
 * Overall impressions
 * The article looks to have a really great basic framework, strengthened by the detail and attention put in each section. It can be improved by adding specific examples of this coming into play. The article is well-developed but could use some more work.
 * Sources
 * All of my sources are primary/secondary articles
 * Sources
 * All of my sources are primary/secondary articles
 * All of my sources are primary/secondary articles
 * All of my sources are primary/secondary articles

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Break up
 * Article Evaluation
 * General
 * I want to add a section about temporary breaks/taking space.
 * Lead section
 * The lead sentence was very descriptive and concise. The rest of the introduction provides references to the main sections of the article. All information in the lead is expanded upon throughout the article.
 * Content
 * The content is all relevant to the topic and is definitely up-to-date.
 * Tone and Balance
 * The article remains mostly neutral in its explanations of this impairment, with no heavy bias towards supporting or refuting breakups, including their causes and effects.
 * Sources and References
 * All facts are backed up and sourced contemporarily and well. Links work.
 * Organization and writing quality
 * The article is concise to read without any problems in grammar, spelling, or organization.
 * Images and Media
 * Talk page discussion
 * The talk page 2 years ago was looking to include a section about replicacy of experiments done to prove the existence of the psychological phenomenon. The article is rated C-class, Low/Mid-importance and is in WikiProject Sociology, listed as level-4 vital article in life. There is no differences in the way Wikipedia discusses the topic as compared to class.
 * Overall impressions
 * The article looks to have a really great base of editors behind it, strengthened by the detail and attention put in each section. It can be improved by adding a caveat of breakups, the temporary break popularized in today's society. The article is well-developed.
 * Images and Media
 * Talk page discussion
 * The talk page 2 years ago was looking to include a section about replicacy of experiments done to prove the existence of the psychological phenomenon. The article is rated C-class, Low/Mid-importance and is in WikiProject Sociology, listed as level-4 vital article in life. There is no differences in the way Wikipedia discusses the topic as compared to class.
 * Overall impressions
 * The article looks to have a really great base of editors behind it, strengthened by the detail and attention put in each section. It can be improved by adding a caveat of breakups, the temporary break popularized in today's society. The article is well-developed.
 * The talk page 2 years ago was looking to include a section about replicacy of experiments done to prove the existence of the psychological phenomenon. The article is rated C-class, Low/Mid-importance and is in WikiProject Sociology, listed as level-4 vital article in life. There is no differences in the way Wikipedia discusses the topic as compared to class.
 * Overall impressions
 * The article looks to have a really great base of editors behind it, strengthened by the detail and attention put in each section. It can be improved by adding a caveat of breakups, the temporary break popularized in today's society. The article is well-developed.
 * The article looks to have a really great base of editors behind it, strengthened by the detail and attention put in each section. It can be improved by adding a caveat of breakups, the temporary break popularized in today's society. The article is well-developed.


 * Sources
 * Most of these sources are blog posts/expert advice answers

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Breaking point


 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources