User:Fishst1xsx/Evaluate an Article

Feminist Rhetoric
Feminist rhetoric

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I found it to be an interesting topic that applies to me as a feminist and a POC. I feel that feminism is often demonized in the media and subjected to white cisgendered females when it should include everyone. I found it refreshing to see an article that had diversity and equity and showed all the wonderful possibilities of the female rhetoric. Truthfully it was an interesting topic to me as well as something I wanted to learn more about in general.

Evaluate the article
Lead section

The lead section of the article starts with a fantastic opening sentence talking about the goal of inclusivity of the feminist rhetoric. Furthermore it distinguished between the rhetorical feminism and the feminist rhetoric and explain what distinguishes the two and their intersection in inclusivity. I did feel however that it briefly left out the challenges of the feminist rhetoric, compared to the other sections in the article. I think it did a good job of describing the goal of the topic, but lacked in the overview of the article.

Content

There was a good balance of content in the article. They covered the history, the themes of gender and society, and wrapped it up with he challenges of the feminist rhetoric. They especially are strong in talking about the underrepresented minorities of the feminist rhetoric, and how they are now being currently included. I did think that they could have explored it in the context of the internet and how that could have played a role in the feminist rhetoric. I think that there is overall more information to be given on the subject and that this article was too short in information.

Tone and Balance

I feel that there was a clear balance at the end of the article where they had talked about the lack of diversity that was represented. This did mention the growing diversity but how this conversation is not met up with action. There was no bias or misrepresentation. Furthermore they did mention the POC viewpoint and how that history built up the feminist rhetoric deposit their misrepresentation.

Sources and References

I think it was fantastic explaining the equity found in the feminist rhetoric but I did feel it lacked in mentioning people as examples of the diversity. It was great in mentioning the cisgendered women who helped the feminist rhetoric but did not mention non-binary or males who contributed. Furthermore some of the women mentioned did not have sources or pages dedicated to them as reference. Perhaps more sources need to be added to this article to ensure the most accurate information for readers.

Organization and Writing quality

It is a very concise article and often had links to other pages that explain terminology that might not be clear to a new reader. As formally mentioned however it did not mention social media or the internet as a section which I felt might have given modern context. However grammatically it was all correct to my knowledge.

Images and media

I felt that more images could have been added to the article even though it was short. I like how an image was given for the writer of bell hooks but the caption could have been more clear. It just mentioned the work but not the writer who was depicted in the picture.

Talk Page Discussion

This page was lacking in modern information and lacked in neutrality formally. Still it lacks more modern or up to date information. It was nominated for delation, but has yet to be removed. I think that for it to be salvaged people need to update sources, add more information and given a broader overview of the feminist rhetoric.

Overall impressions

The article is nominated for delation but has yet to do so. It gave a good summary of the feminist rhetoric but lacked in providing more information. They only mentioned female contributors to the topic and also lacked in provided sources for some of those women. More images could have been added and the one image provided need a better caption. Overall this just skimmed the surface of the feminist rhetoric and needed more information with more sources. This article will likely not be delated but does need heavy revising.

Fishst1xsx (talk) 21:04, 21 February 2023 (UTC)