Talk:Occupational segregation/Archives/2012

Substantial Edits to Occupational Segregation Page
I propose to make substantial edits to the Occupational Segregation Page. While the current page is a good start, it provides very few references and each of the sections is quite short. I propose to expand the introductory section to provide a more comprehensive overview of what occupational segregation is. I will also go into more depth in the "Types" section, further explaining the differences between horizontal and vertical segregation, and also introducing other key terms such as ghettoization and resegregation. I also plan to discuss the gendered division of labor and the gendered division of work in the "Causes" section, and I will add two sections: "Consequences of Occupational Segregation" and "Policy Designed to Eliminate Occupational Segregation." I plan to eliminate the "Non-Traditional Jobs Held by Men" and the "Non-Traditional Jobs Held by Women" sections. Occupational Segregation is a largely economic topic, but my background is primarily in sociology, so I will be looking for any assistance possible with the economic information. Are there any other sections that might be important to add? K Gagalis (talk) 19:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review
Overall this is a very thorough and well-researched page. The page organization makes a lot of sense and is easily followed by a reader only minimally familiar with the topic. The intro section is particularly enlightening and concise. Also, the delineation between horizontal and vertical is very well-done and useful. Really good work!

One overall point for improvement according to the Wikipedia manual of style all titles should only have the first word capitalized. So, for example, the page currently says “Gendered Division of Labor.” Instead it should read “Gendered division of labor” with only the first word “Gendered” capitalized. This should be changed throughout, on all section titles.

What follows are specific points of possible improvement by section:

Intro Section: The last sentence, beginning with “Both of these forms” is a bit awkwardly worded currently. It might be more clear to say something like “Both of these forms of occupational segregation contribute to the gender wage gap.” Also it might be useful here to add a link to the gender pay gap page.

Types/Horizontal: Might link to the post-industrial society page somewhere in this paragraph where post-industrial restructuring of the economy is mentioned. Also might link to the care work page where it is mentioned. The last sentence in this sub-section has very important ideas, but is presented in a way that borders on sounding non-neutral. Perhaps change the wording a bit to make it more neutral sounding.

Types/Vertical: Might remove the first sentence altogether. The second sentence is stronger and more clear.

Causes/Gendered Division of Labor: The assertion that “the earliest division of labor within society was by gender” needs a citation. The second sentence mentions “the economy and the polity”, might be good to change “economy” to “market.”

Causes/Gender Essentialism: This section seems very important. I tried to see if there is a general wikipage on it and there does not seem to be one. The idea is mentioned on the essentialism page in a subsection. Might try to link to it, but I am not sure how. Also, there is a typo in the first sentence in this section it currently reads “Gender essentialism is they view that”; it seems that the “they” should say “the.”

Maintenance mechanisms/Self-selection: Typo in the 2nd sentence. Currently reads “While it is possible that such self-select exists,” it should probably be “self-selection.” The idea of “peace within the households” seems a bit strange, I might remove this phrase altogether.

Maintenance mechanisms/Educational disparities: the last sentence in this section, I think, is an example of stating something as fact that is more of a certain researcher’s position. I might re-phrase this sentence to say “so and so argue that ‘this choice, like others, is often made…’” if that makes sense.

Maintenance mechanisms/Job search strategies: more references if possible would be good.

Maintenance mechanisms/Inter-generational Maintenance: change “recent” to “recently” in the first sentence and watch for passive voice.

Occupational Segregation and the Gendered pay gap: Add a main article link to the gender pay gap page using this code Also maybe add some info from our class reading from March 6 by Akerlof and Kranton (2010) and Identity Economics. Maybe in this section or maybe others.

Measuring occupational segregation: Separate the first and second steps with a hard return so they are on separate lines in order to increase readability.

Solutions: Missing period at the end of the 2nd sentence. Remove comma after “States” in the sentence that begins “Given that in the United….” Might be useful to mention affirmative action here.

Virginiawhite09 (talk) 22:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review
Great article selection! I have a few suggestions which may improve the quality of the article:

1) Lead Section - Typically lead sections don't include specialized terminology. The current lead section is heavily abstract, academic, and difficult for a general audience to audience. Remember, Wikipedia caters to a basic audience who comes in with no prior knowledge. Your lead section must define occupational segregation in basic, layman's terms. What are ascribed characteristics? Is 'occupational segregation' an economics term? Explain its relevancy to a general audience. The first paragraph (and sentence) should define the term in basic terms, not academic jargon. The second paragraph of your lead section was aptly put and easy for a general audience to follow!

2) Language, Conciseness, Word Choice - Rather than being general in tone and content, offer more specific information and statistics. For example, cut out general remarks and transitional phrases like "more specifically." Rather than providing a general statement, provide substantive statistics and information. Also, work on being concise and chopping and splicing long winded sentences like this one: "One factor that is highlighted as being largely responsible for occupational segregation is the idea that men and women, from a young age, are socialized into specific gender roles that tell them how they should be and act, depending on their gender." A more concise way of editing that sentence is: "From a young age, men and women are socialized into specific gender roles that dictate how they should act. These strict gender norms are largely responsible for occupational segregation."

Well-done differentiation between horizontal and vertical segregation. However, Wikify the page by includes in-text links to other Wikipedia articles. Also, bolden/italicize key points in text. And include some images!

Clearly you've well-researched the article topic and it shows! Also, the organization on the page is just outstanding. Good luck with the revisions! 01:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saimatoppa (talk • contribs)

Section titles
It seems to me that the titles of the sections should be "Jobs Traditionally Held By Men/Women" instead of "Non-Traditional Jobs Held By Men/Women." Am I misreading it? VampireCoffee (talk) 02:32, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Rice University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 17:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)