User:Josiemills99/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Language and Gender
 * We have talked a lot about the way in which language impacts out conceptions of gender in class and I found this article interesting

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * I think that the lead is a bit dense and while I understand that this topic is fairly academic it could benefit from a slightly more accessible first paragraph.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Again, the lead acts almost as a history section of the topic and does not lay out the subsections which themselves seem concise. I think that the article would benefit from expanding the history section (i.e. moving some of the lead there) and focusing on a more straightforward intro to the topic.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, the lead mentions historical facts that are not replicated in the history section as well as information about the division of the field that isn't specifically mentioned later.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Overly detailed

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * I think that it is, especially considering that gender in the academic sense is evolving quickly and a relatively new field the information encompasses what I would expect.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is a lot of content but the topic is also very broad so that makes sense. All of the information relates to the subject as in organized within the article well so in that sense everything is in place. The article could benefit from expansion of specific topics within it, like the addition of pages addressing specific subsections.
 * There is a lot of content but the topic is also very broad so that makes sense. All of the information relates to the subject as in organized within the article well so in that sense everything is in place. The article could benefit from expansion of specific topics within it, like the addition of pages addressing specific subsections.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article is very neutral and sticks mostly to the academic side of the language discussion which allows for neutrality and avoids the potentially controversial parts about gender.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I could not find any claims that weren't sourced to academics or that were obviously biased. Since the article focuses on how gender studies uses languages it may be seen as some as left leaning as most of those studeis are but I don't think its overtly biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * I did not go through every source but the ones I checked were all well known academics or publishers and the article did not use blogs or websites.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Like I said, the topic is very broad so I am sure that there are sources that could be referenced but weren't. However the sources that were used were a variety and from different academic backgrounds.
 * Are the sources current?
 * There was a mix of sources with some dating back to the 1990's. However those were primarily used to reference the specific academic fields and the article topic lends itself to some historical incorporation to show evolution of language so I think that it's fine.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links that I checked did work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is a bit dense but its an academic heavy topic. The writing is clear if not a bit wordy.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I didn't immediately notice any grammar errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * After the first couple sections the organization is good. I think that the lead and the first two sections, history and linguistic variations could use subsections and more structure.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article doesn't contain any images.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Most of the contributions to the talk page are fairly old and they seem to center around perceived bias or ways to tweak the portrayal of certain topics. There is also some critique of the out-dated nature of sources but countered by the fact that there is limited reliable new information.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is part of two WikiProjects, linguistics and gender studies ad is rated as C-Class.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I was expecting the Wikipedia page to delve more into the transformation of gendered language in culture but it focuses on a much more academic transformation and usage.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is a good overview and cites sources that are good follow up reads but could use some more editing and a consensus on a couple topics.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article is a broad overview of a lot of subsections and is a good starting point for finding topics to narrow research or expanding conceptions of what falls in to the language and gender category.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think that some editing of the lead section is a good place to start.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is on it's way to being developed but is a bit complete and under edited.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: