Wikipedia:Peer review/Pro-ana/archive2

Pro-ana

Previous peer review

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for April 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Hello there! I've done some cleanups of this article, and tried to address everything raised in the previous review. Could someone eyeball it to see what kind of work it still needs? Cheers.—Nailbiter (talk) 11:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• While I don't have the time to make a full review, I would say that if your intent is to get it to FAC (as you wanted to when you applied for the previous review) you are unlikely to be successful; the article is far too short and brief. Ironholds (talk) 18:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Casliber

The big quandary really is how much context to place in the article - anorexia is a serious diagnosis with a 25% mortality, and the way the article reads now it is completely trivialised. However, I am wary about overloading the article with general info on anorexia as well.

What is really lacking is some scholarly sociological material on groups of people with anorexia and advocacy. I am sure some has been written. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Comments from WhatamIdoing

It would be interesting to see whether any sources could be found that describe anosognosia (lack of insight into your own disordered behavior) as a characteristic of this eating disorder. The pro-ana line about it being "just" a lifestyle choice certainly has some features in common with people that have no insight into their psychotic episodes. I know this is talked about, but I'm not sure whether we'll find any proper sources on the subject. Here are some that come close:

• A book on mental stigma that says common pro-ana views deny any biomedical causes and attributes the choice solely to personal/political preference (p. 234)
• A chapter in this book (starts on page 75) connects anorexia to the feminist movement. It also describes pro-ana claims about being "not sick", "anti-recovery", and "choosing not to recover", with connections to female empowerment (p 84) and goes on to discuss the identity of pro-ana persons construct for themselves as a person who asserts personal power through choosing powerful pain. (Sort of a "I hurt, therefore I exist" identity).
• This book asserts that the two common (among professionals) ideas are that anorexics have a "false consciousness" or that they "are sick", and the impact of this false-consciousness theory on anorexic people (who then feel like no one understands them, which the author relates directly to the creation of pro-ana communities as a way of connecting to people that understand them) (p 60).

Here are a few other sources that might be useful in this article:

• PMID 16984715 (not free) discusses the way the Internet communities identify themselves, their subgroups, and outsiders.
• PMID 16313524 (not free) compares the pro-ana explanation for this disease to medical, psychosocial, sociocultural and feminist models, along with ethnographic and interview material at a large pro-ana website.
• ISBN 9781843105978 (p 103) could be used to support the assertion that pro-ana website have disclaimers.

I hope this helps, WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)