User:Emand2026/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
WikiProject 1000 Women in Religion

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I wanted to look for something I didn't really know anything about! I thought it might be fun. Additionally, I've never heard of a group like this which works to improve existing articles based on certain criteria (i.e., articles about women).

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:

The lead section provides a very concise overview of 1000 Women in Religion. There is no information about the article's major sections in the lead. It may be helpful to indicate when this group was started.

Content:

The article does seem to address Wikipedia's equity gaps. 1000 Women in Religion is essentially aimed toward improving the quality of articles about cisgender and transgender women. It seems as though individuals who are a part of 1000 Women in Religion work to edit and create Wikipedia articles about women in academia/scholarly fields, religious disciplines, etc. The article's content is relevant (and includes a link to their website) and appears to be up-tp-date, with virtual meeting times listed for 2022. I think perhaps adding some more information about the history of this group or something along those lines may be beneficial, as the only information about 1000 Women in Religion (i.e., what they do and their goals) is in the summary at the very beginning. I notice that this page links articles they've edited from 2021-2022. Was the group started in 2021 or is this page missing information from prior years?

Tone and Balance:

This article appears neutral. I don't see any wild, biased claims. The article does attempt to persuade the reader, but only in regard to getting involved or reaching out to certain members of 1000 Women in Religion if interested.

Sources and References:

Upon clicking a few links, they seem to work. I don't see any in-text citations at all. However, I do see citations referring to articles that have been edited by this group organized by year.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The article is concise and generally well-written. The information appears to be well-organized. Consider adding another section elaborating on the information found in the lead.

Images and Media:

There are a couple of relevant images at the top of the page, one with a caption. Farther down, there is a figure which indicates the quality and importance of the articles they have worked on.

Talk Page Discussion:

There are no discussions here and no other information.

Overall Impressions:

The article is rated by Wikipedia as C-class (low importance). I believe the lead is quite strong and I enjoy that they added relevant images.

Although the lead is concise and helpful, I think it would be nice to include a longer section farther down which includes more details about 1000 Women in Religion, including how they started, why they are important, etc., beyond what is already covered (which is not much). Therefore, I find the article to be a bit under-developed.