User:HillyBilly1252/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Heterosexuality - Wikipedia

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 review this article because it is short enough to provide a quality review, relates to the course material (WikiEDU module) and is a topic relevant to the social sciences. This article matters because sexuality and the moral panic around it is an important social and political issue today. My first impression is that it is a well researched article, but focuses primarily on the scientific side of heterosexuality, and less on the social implications of heterosexuality.

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.)

Lead: The lead provides an overview of what heterosexuality is and the first half of the article but entirely skips the "Society and Culture" section, sticking to mainly the scientific and demographic facts.

Content: The content feels very Eurocentric and only covers the history of heterosexuality in Europe, rather than a more global understanding and history.

Tone and Balance: The article is neutral and summarizes ideas while staying partial.

Sources and References: The sources are current but fail to show diversity, with many of them coming from Europe or America. As mentioned above, providing broader understandings of heterosexuality would improve the article.

Organization and Writing Quality: Both the writing and sections are clear, it is a well written and easy to follow article.

Images and Media: I don't think that the article help understand the subject matter, and should be moved to be more aesthetically pleasing. Having all images the same size makes the page look clunky.

Talk Page: There is discussion about the definition of heterosexual and the comparison between gender and sexuality. There are not heated debates, only minor changes in how language is evolving.

Overall Impression: It is a well researched article, but focuses primarily on the scientific side of heterosexuality, and less on the social implications of heterosexuality. I think that it would be more culturally relevant if it provided some discourse about heterosexuality being pushed onto cultures through colonization and European ideals. The article feels very Eurocentric and needs more perspective from the Global South, but is overall a well written article.