User:Tanipolansky/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Compassion-focused therapy

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose the article to evaluate because I am particularly interested in studying this modality of therapy at the present moment. My clinical supervisor is trained in this modality and I have enjoyed what I learned about it so far. My preliminary impression of the article was that it was thoughtfully written, albeit with some redundancies in the information presented.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

In evaluating the Lead section, the Lead section is comprehensive and useful. The lead section could use rewording to enhance clarity, but is concise and clear. The lead section does not include a brief description of the article's major sections, although the article is brief enough that It seems unnecessary to add those descriptors. Everything discussed in the lead section is discussed in the article.

Regarding content, the content is not current, as the most recent source is from 2016. All of the content fits well within the article, and while there may be some concepts that are not thoroughly discussed, it seems that the purpose of the article was simply to discuss the core principles of the article, something that the authors did well. The article does not have equity gaps given that It is simply describing a modality of therapy which can be applied to members of diverse populations.

Regarding tone and balance, the article is written from a neutral point of view. The authors share the utility of this modality of therapy clearly while also acknowledging scarcity of data to back up particular claims. The article is informative and written simply to share the core features of CFT.

Regarding sources and references, the facts are all backed up by reliable sources of peer reviewed information, and the links are functional. Although somewhat outdated, the secondary sources information is recent enough and thorough enough to establish the veracity of the claims made in the article.

Regarding organization and writing quality, It is here that I see room for improvement. There were some glaring grammatical errors, two of which I changed while reading the article, and there were components that were shared in the overview that really could have been developed more thoroughly, such as the theoretical backbone of CFT, and the three primal types of emotion regulation within the human species. Additionally, there is not much information regarding the origin of the modality origin, and the information on application of the modality is scarce as well. The applications page indicates the modalities utility for "several different phsychological disorders", but only specifies one.

There are no images in the article, and I think that the article could benefit from images as well. There are numerous diagrams that Gilbert uses to demonstrate his modality, but they are not shared here.

Talk page discussions are scarce, and it is apparent that this really is the beginning of this page, and there is substantial work to be done in this regard.

Overall, I believe the article is useful and well done as an introductory article, and expresses the core tenets of CFT well, but there is much room for improvement on the article. The article could use a grammatical tune up, images and diagrams, and more information regarding application of the modality and research on its utility in the therapeutic process. I think there is work to be done on the article, but it is started well.