User talk:Abbyswope1/sandbox

Article Evaluation (Conversion therapy)
Everything in the article relates to the topic and there is a lot of good content that is worth the read. The dates in this article only go back to 2018, so it is really up to date. The only thing I could see that would need improvement is the amount of content on one article. It could have been summed up in a better manner than what it is. This topic could be very bias depending on which side of the issue you are on, but the person who wrote this kept it neutral. Most of the references come straight from online PDF'S, meaning that the information provided is accurate. The links provided below the article do work and they send you to websites that are very reliable. I don't see any talking going on behind the scenes of this article. The article is rated a B in all categories.Abbyswope1 (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Don't forget to sign your talk/sandbox pages by signing using the 4 tildes in source editing mode. --Dr AB Swan (talk) 21:27, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

As I look at the Self-Destructive Behavior Page I see there isn't a lot written in the causes section, so one thing I would like to do is take a deeper look into the causes and see if I can further elaborate on that. If possible even, I would like to dig into different types of self-destructive behavior and further elaborate on eating disorders or substance abuse. Finally, I would like to go into further depth to describe self-destructive behavior. There isn't a lot of current information on it, so I hope I can find reliable information.

'On the Talk Page It was brought up how someone recommends that we should explain how self-destructive behavior can intentionally ruin one's life in some way or form. I don't know if I agree with this, a person with a bad personal experience with one who has a self-destructive behavior could have misunderstood the concept.

'''Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Are some areas under- or over-developed?''' What I've read so far, all of the content is related to the topic. Most areas are underdeveloped.

Is it written neutrally? Yes, this article is written neutrally. However, in the talk page it wasn't

'''Does each claim have a citation? Are the citations reliable?''' No, none of the forms have a citation. The 5 citations I see are reliable.

Possible Sources?

https://www.aconsciousrethink.com/9153/self-destructive-behavior/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8eAA1WPFyk

https://study.com/academy/lesson/self-destructive-behavior-signs-causes-effects.html

Mdarrow18 (talk) 01:37, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Madison DarrowAbbyswope1 (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2019 (UTC)