User:Jhumphreys1234/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Feminist rhetoric

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am extremely interested in feminism and enjoy reading about it.

Evaluate the article
Lead section- The lead section is very well written and informative. One change I would make is to use more common language that all readers would be able to understand. I also think the distinction between feminist rhetoric and rhetorical feminism is unnecessary in the lead section.

Content- This article does a great job at addressing minorities and oppressed peoples. It also has a lot of very through information about feminist rhetoric that covers every aspect of the topic. It does seem to be a bit bias in favor of the feminist rhetoric, but i'm not complaining as it is very supportive using words such as strength.

Tone and balance- This article is heavy on the history section. As i said before it is obviously in support of the feminist rhetoric. As much as I appreciate this, it does seem to try to persuade in favor of women's rights.

Sources and references- The references are reliable and the first is even supported by Rollins College. The links do work. The sources do mostly seem to be written by women. I couldn't personally find any sources that were better suited for the article as these were educational and viable.

Organization and writing quality- I do believe that Challenges and Implications should be next to each other at the end rather than split. The writing quality is very high, but I do think it's almost difficult to understand. Using more common vocabulary or explaining certain words in the article would help. Other than that I like the way the article is organized.

Images and media- There is only two photographs in this article, One of which doesn't support the information that well. More examples of feminist rhetoric should be included especially in the history section as there is only one. There should also be media for race and ethnicity as well as challenges and there is not.

Talk page discussions- This article was obviously written by a student and is being edited by students in communication classes. One edit was made about neutrality. It is a part of the wiki education foundation supported course assignments. Other than that there is not many people talking on the talk page. It is rated as C-Class.

Overall impressions- This article is well written and informative but a bit confusing. It most definitely needs more media and photographs. It would benefit from more people searching information on the topic to help support it. It is rated as a C Class article which I do agree with.