User:Calypso99/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Gender studies

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 this article because I believe that having an understanding of the importance of one's own gender identity and others is key to being successful in both the workplace and day-to-day interactions. The article is important because it shows the connection it has to other disciplines I'm interested in looking more into. My preliminary impression was that it was well written and heavily researched, looking at the list of references.

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 Gender studies article opened up with a brief statement of what gender studies was in a clear and concise manner, it was not overly detailed but it included links to other topics/fields of study that related to the topic. The content of the article was a bit confusing and there was information that seemed to not be necessary as well as a lack of information on certain things. While the article briefly discussed both women's and men's studies, I feel like there could be more said to women's studies as when comparing the time spent on the topic to men's, there is a difference, although there were more links in the women's studies section as compared to the men's studies. The sources for the article were varied and while some resources were drawn from more than others, I didn't feel a direct sense of bias in the article. In regards to the talk page of the article, there was a lot of discussion on whether or not gender studies and women's studies should be merged as it seems that topics like men's, queer- and non-binary studies fall under the gender studies umbrella but women's studies stands on it's own. The article was rated as "needs improvement" as of September of last year. I believe that while it written well it could definitely use some work, specifically in how it's broken up.