User:Anjdarji/sandbox

Which article are you evaluating?
Gender studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because gender studies because is a field that has controversial topics and I wanted to see if there was bias information on the article. I also went with the thought that there could be blog posts or framing errors that could misconstrued the information and I wanted to see what references the page used. From first glance, there are many different resources cited and it looks as though it will be a great reference to a well formatted article.

Evaluate the article
The article has a strong leading section. It is concise enough to have encapsulated what gender studies is and the different ways gender is analyzed without the wordy context itself. The leading section does also list prominent psychoanalysts in the field without telling about their different perspectives and theories.

The content of the article was relevant and well organized. It begins with Freud's first theories on unconscious structures that would later lead into analysts looking more into gender and a field of study. The information that is in the article is poorly cited and missing many citations. The information on theories of history and development of theory that is there is well written and from a neutral perspective but lacking in content. I believe there is more to be said and I think the headings are misleading. The "influences" heading speaks of the history and different theories but the "history" heading then talks about the different analysts that have influenced and developed gender studies. While I do not think the two headings should be switched, I do think the headers should be reconsidered to better summarize the content of the article. There is a section for criticisms that I am glad they included because I think it gives good context to the history of gender studies and the different struggles it has gone through to be recognized globally. It think this section is also lacking in content but off to a strong start. I enjoyed reading the article and learned more about the topic from this article. The talk page also brought up good points to change header names to avoid bias and other capitalizations to also avoid bias. The forum seems very professional and just goes to show how important it is that there are multiple editors helping to ensure that there is no unconscious bias in articles that are so controversial and fairly new.