User:TartCherrySourGrape/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
LSD

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I choose this article because I am currently taking a psychopharmacology course, and am studying LSD and its effect on the brain. I have enough baseline knowledge about the topic to make informed edits and evaluate tone. My first impressions of the article are it is very science heavy, focusing a lot the chemical compounds and its make up and less on the history of the drug and its uses.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:

The lead section is very through and does a good job introducing the drug, its uses and its chemical compisiton. That being said, the lead section isn't very clear in the article. Instead, the introduction is about 5 paragraphs long. I think the article would benefit from a more concise intro, where the a couple of sentence outline broadly what LSD is before jumping into the introductions. The overly detailed lead section lowers the readability fo the article.

Content:

The article adopts a comprehensive perspective on LSD. Notably, it remains current by referencing a pivotal 2020 study that explored LSD's efficacy in mitigating alcoholism among adults. However, the article predominantly focuses on elucidating LSD's chemical composition, relegating its recreational applications to a mere two lines under a separate header. This emphasis on the chemical aspect is evident through multiple paragraphs dedicated to this facet. While the narrative briefly touches upon LSD's historical medical applications, particularly in treating conditions such as schizophrenia and alcoholism during the 1950s and 1960s, there's an opportunity to dive deeper into its neural mechanisms and therapeutic potential. Impressively, the article adeptly delineates LSD's effects and psychopharmacological nuances. Yet, in the societal context, there's a noticeable gap in discussing the drug's profound cultural impact during the tumultuous decades of the 1960s and 1970s. Expanding upon this facet could enrich the reader's understanding of LSD's broader significance beyond its pharmacological attributes.

Tone and Balance:

This article has a very neutral tone. LSD is an illegal drug because of it potency, but has some positive applied effects. The article acknowledges both the drug's influence and legal status without spending too much time contesting if and why it should be banned. The diction uses does not have any persuasive rhetoric and its very balanced.

Sources and References:

Most facts listed in the article are supported with a cited footnote. There were only two instances I found a footnote with a "page needed" marker instead of a citation. The links in the article are relevant, and few that I clicked through redirected me correctly. However, the sources listed are a little outdated. There are some current citations, but the majority of the sources are from the mid-2000s. It might be beneficial to update these, especially with new studies about applied LSD uses coming out.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The organization of this article is its biggest area for improvement. As mentioned earlier, the intro is too lengthy, and the article needs a concise introduction to the topic. Moreover, I would reorganize the article to group all the medical and neuro-heavy sections at the top, and then transition into the drug's history, spiritual uses, and social context.

Images and Media

All images on the page are cited and displayed nicely. Some of the diagrams are helpful, especially given complex medical and scientific information. Overall, the page is very long and could use more images to break up the bigger blocks of text. There could be more photos of LSD-inspired artwork and examples of creative movement and aesthetic it inspired in the 1960s and 70s.

Talk Page Discussion

The talk page denotes that there are multiple WikiProjects invested in the page. The page is very popular and has been cited by news sources and rated as a level-5 vital page. There are some discussions on the page about the nuances in the scientific naming of the drug, without consensus. Lastly, there were discussions about some of the word choices in the article and how phrases like "trip" or "mystical experiences" aren't academic in nature and don't align with the preferred tone of the article.

Overal Impressions

This article, owing to its high viewership, is a hub of considerable activity and information exchange. Personally, I observed that while the content is robust, the article itself appears somewhat dense and lacks a cohesive organizational structure. Nonetheless, its strength lies in the depth and breadth of its content, which undoubtedly contributes to its popularity and the continuous engagement it garners from its readership. I would say that the article is very well develop, but its high level of contributors has left it a little disorganized.