User talk:Lmeola

Welcome!
Hello, Lmeola, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:58, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I’m Casey Farrissey, one of your peer editors.

The Lead Section: Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic? Does the lead section report the most important information? --The lead is concise and lets me know that autism spectrum encompasses multiple developmental disorders. At first it was a bit difficult to read, but only because the terms associated with it are very specific to the disorder itself, and not commonly known if people are not familiar with the topic.

Structure: Are the sections organized well? Would they make more sense presented some other way? --I think that the sections are presented well, but I am surprised that History is number 8 on the list rather than at the top. But, that might be indicative of what’s truly important about autism spectrum. The subsections of the sections are easy to navigate.

Balance: Are any major viewpoints left out? Is anything off-topic? --From what I know about autism spectrum, I feel that this article does a good job including viewpoints as well as controversies that are associated with it. I don’t notice that anything is off topic.

Neutral: Is the article neutral in tone? Can you guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? Are there words or phrases that don't seem neutral? Look for "the best," "most people," "obviously, [x]" Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." --I thought that this article would not be neutral simply because autism is a topic that many people feel strongly about. However, the article did a really good job of suggesting things without saying that certain things were “right” or “wrong”. The article does however include a lot of “most’s” and a few “some’s”.

Reliable sources: What types of sources does the article primarily use? Are there unsourced statements in the article? Are there only a few sources, or is most of the information from only one or two sources? --These seem to be some of the most reliable sources ive seen on a Wikipedia article during my work for this course. Since it is so science and psychology related, the scholarly articles (lots of them!) definitely make me feel confident in reading what is presented in this article.

Caseyfarrissey (talk) 02:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)