User:Baileyherman/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Transfeminism

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose to evaluate this article because I feel that it both relates to class material on the basis of all of politics being gendered, and also because the topic of including trans women in feminist agendas is incredibly interesting and important to me. My initial impression of it was that even within a niche subcategory of feminism, the article was dense with information and many subcategories. I was skeptical by the disclaimer that parts of the article may contain original research that needs to be proven correct or incorrect, which left me with a distrust of the information presented.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The Lead section of this article is concise and informative as to what the article intends to outline. The introductory sentence concisely and clearly describes the article's topic, does not include information that is not present in the article's body, and does not attempt to persuade the reader towards any opinion.

The content of the article is relevant and up to date. It takes the stance of a mostly neutral point of view, acknowledging that there are different spheres of beliefs within the topic of Transfeminism and does its best to represent all of them. The article itself works on one of Wikipedia's equity gaps by representing the transgender community, a group often overlooked in society and especially within feminism.

This article's sources are generally reliable and up to date. It cites academic journals, articles, and books with trustworthy reputations. The references provided at the end are accessible to readers via their organization. The sources seem to be of high quality and allow for a deeper understanding of the topic of Transfeminism.

The writing quality and organization of the article are strong. The writing can be understood by a broad audience while remaining informative and academic. Niche terms and field jargon are defined so that readers can maintain understanding when technical words come into play. This being said, there are some terms and language that could be simplified to reach an even wider audience. The use of headings and subheadings are generally strong, however the article could benefit from more of these organizational tools in certain places. For example, the "Theory" section could benefit from being divided into sections to clarify and make more digestible.

The article includes very few images, and those that are there do very little to enhance the article and add information or understanding. It would be helpful to incorporate more images and to ensure that they are related to and work in tandem with the text.

The conversations on the Talk page mostly surround the topic of this article containing original research and that some of the language being unnecessarily advanced or niche. The article is part of several Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignments. Wikipedia discusses feminism and trans rights in more of a historical sense than we do in class. We focus on the way gender issues play into modern politics and impact almost every aspect of political life instead of the scholars behind trans-theory.

Overall, this is a strong Wikipedia article. There is a broad range of information covered, providing a comprehensive coverage of Transfeminism. Further, there is representation of diverse perspectives among reliable citations and mostly clear organization. To improve, I would clarify some of the technical language, and divide some of the longer sections to increase clarity.