User:Jnguyen2003/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Cultural identity

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 this article because cultural identity is an important sociological concept that can describe an individual's self-perception of themselves through their culture. It is important because people express their cultural identity through their nationality, ethnicity, religion, social class, etc. It allows individuals to express who they want to identify as and its their understanding of who they are through their culture. Everyone has characteristics that may contribute to their cultural identity and how they view themselves. As an Asian-American, I express my cultural identity through food, language, or even the clothes I wear. It's important because people can identify in one or more cultures and it is shaped by values and attitudes in their community.

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.)

The article starts off strong with a good lead section. It has a concise topic sentence that gives you the general idea of what the article is about, in this case cultural identity. It sets the readers up for the article's major sections and highlights the main points of the article. I would say it could be more concise of the topic because it explains the topics in more detail in the introduction. The article's content is relevant to the topic, but one of the headings is missing information. I would say the last section about the internet isn't in a neutral tone. The sources are not current and some are almost over twenty years old. There are multiple authors and sources cited that are able to back up the evidence given. There are a few grammatical errors throughout the article, but it is generally easy to read and concise throughout. The article only includes two images that don't enhance the articles topic. The talk page includes people pointing out mistakes in the article and giving their opinions. I would say the article needs to be revised and have some new evidence from current sources.