User:Gammel.juliette/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

 * Structural functionalism
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article because of my interest in social sciences. Last year, while taking Introduction to Sociology, the theories of sociology sparked my curiosity.

Lead


 * Yes; however, there is no need to say "simply."
 * Yes. yet, the article first talks about Herbert Spencer; I would put the introduction about him first before you talk about the characteristics of functionalism.
 * No.
 * The Lead is concise; however, I would make some minor wording changes to make the introduction flow better...ex: constituent elements: norms, customs, traditions, and institutions.

Content

 * The article's content is mostly relevant to the topic; this article mainly talks about what different people attributed to structural functionalism, not functionalism itself.


 * For the most part, the content is up to date. Structural functionalism is a sociological theory. Therefore, the basic idea of sociology has not changed; yet, society is constantly changing (the 1920s and present day are two different societal eras) there are different societal examples that can structural functionalism can be applied too. Try to come up with a 2019 present-day example.
 * It is possible to consolidate what the different people attributed to the theory of structural functionalism and focus more what the theory actually is.

Tone and Balance

 * The article is neutral.
 * There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position. There are different people who believed different things in regards to the theory, but the author did a good job at clarifying that those opinions were the people's not his/hers.
 * All view points are neutral.
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References

 * All all facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.
 * The sources are thorough as they do reflect the available literature on the topic.
 * The sources are mostly current-there are some places where citations are needed.
 * Yes, the links I checked worked.

Organization

 * The article is on the "wordy" side. The author could concise at some points and summarize the different attributers to structural functionalism. For the most part, the article lacks grammatical mistakes. The article is easy to read, especially if you have a generalized background knowledge
 * Minimal grammatical or spelling errors-more awkward phrasing than anything else.
 * The article is well-organized as it is broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic (or in this case attributers to structural functionalism).

Images and Media

 * No images are used to enhance the understanding of structural functionalism; however, pictures of attributers to structural functionalism are present.
 * Only attributer's name; no detailed captions because no images of structural functionalism.
 * Yes, all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, the images laid are out in a visually appealing way.

Checking the talk page

 * The most current conversations dealt with citation issues and the possibility of making the different attributers of structural functionalism their own pages.
 * Article is rated fair; it is part of various WikiProjects.
 * Wikipedia discusses this topic by its founder and other attributors rather than by examples of structural functionalism in society, which is how I learned about the theory in class.

Overall impressions

 * The article's overall status is basic; there is no exciting or engaging examples. Very historical in presentation; too much about people and not enough about the theory.
 * The article does a good job at giving the standard definition of structural functionalism. The article gives good detail about the attributors and how their thoughts influenced the theory. Also, there were minimal obvious errors.
 * The article can be improved by consolidating the historical attributors to one to three paragraphs; also, the article can be improved by using clear and concise wording. The most important thing to add would be real-life examples of structural functionalism (include examples of latent and manifest functions as well)
 * The article is complete; the article is well-developed, if the author's primary intention was to talk about the attributors. However, the article is underdeveloped, if the author wanted to describe in detail the sociological theory of structural functionalism.

Optional activity

 * Why did you decide to talk more about the attributors than the theory itself?


 * Link to feedback: ~Gammel.juliette