User:Zafomby/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Causes of autism

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 have chosen to evaluate this article because, as a person with ASD, I feel personally connected with this topic. Wikipedia is often one of the first sites that people go to when searching of information on a medically related subject. For this reason, having accurate and up to date information available on these subjects is vitally important in order to avoid the dissemination of incorrect information. For non-medical topics, out of date information may not have a dramatic impact, however, for medical subjects such as this, spreading inaccurate information can lead to disastrous results.

My first impression of this article was that it was very detailed and touched on all necessary aspects of the discussion. However, I then noticed that there were quite a few issues with the article.

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.)

Lead Section

The lead section of this article is concise and contains just enough information to prepare readers for the article. The lead section has a strong introductory sentence. The lead section does not describe each of the articles main sections.

Content

All content included in the article is relevant to the topic. Article content is out of date, but mostly accurate. There is no important content missing from the article or extraneous information. Aspects of the topics related to historically under-represented have not been included in the article.

Tone and Balance

A neutral tone is employed throughout the article. There are no heavily biased claims towards certain positions. Viewpoints are appropriately represented throughout the article. The article does not attempt to lead the reader into a particular line of thought.

Sources and References

Facts throughout the article are often backed by primary sources rather than secondary sources. Sources used for the article are thorough and reflect available literature on the topic. However, many sources used for the article are out of date. Very few of the sources cited in the article are current. The sources used are from a wide array of authors and included sources written by authors from historically under-represented groups. Better, and more up to date sources are available for many of the out of date sources used in the article. Peer-reviewed articles are available that can take the place of news coverage and information from other websites. Article links work.

Organization and writing quality

The article is written in a clear and professional manner. Some sections of the article are overly convoluted and could serve to be more concise. Improving the organization and detail for some of the article sections would help to increase readability. The content is organized into appropriate sections that detail the topics main points. The are various errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation throughout the article.

Images and Media

One image is used at the start of the article to show the how autism relates to the section of the brain. The image is well-captioned and adheres to copyright rules. The image is placed in such a way that it does not decrease the article's visual appeal. The addition of the image adds a touch of illustration that would prevent readers from being discouraged by the wordiness of the remainder of the article. The article does not include other images or media to help with the understanding of the topic.

Talk page discussion

The article is a part of the Disability, Psychology, Medicine/ Medical Genetics, and Autism WikiProjects. It is rated as c-class on Wikipedia's content scale. No conversations have taken place on the article's talk page since 2018. The last discussions were on proposals to add mitochondrial dysfunction as a sub-section on the vaccine section of the article and as a section in the related disorders section of the article. A conversation regarding the inclusion of two citations into the article also occurred in 2017.

The way topics are discussed on the article's talk page is very rude and does not really promote group work. This may just be the case for this article's talk page, but the communication between some of the reviewers is not very professional and is based on personal opinions and thought without giving valid explanations for their input.

Overall Impressions

The strengths of this article are its attention to detail regarding the various sub-sections of each of the topics being discussed; the completeness of the article's references and citations and their appropriate use throughout the text; as well as its strong lead section and lack of distracting information. The article could be further improved by adding up to date citations to the article, removing out of date information, replacing inappropriate sources with citations and updated text from current secondary sources, improving organization and writing quality throughout the article, and rewording sections to make it easier for the average reader to understand. The article is currently rated at C-class. There are many aspects of this article that could be improved. Although the information presented in the article is substantial and well-developed, it needs a large amount of editing as well as improvement to the quality of information (i.e., close gaps and remove unnecessary details).