User:Kennedy303/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Social Structure

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am interested in social structures and the influence they have on our lives. This article is important not only as a key topic in sociology, but as a concept that is shared across several social sciences. My preliminary impression of this article was that it seemed of alright quality. It was a bit hard to read at times, but it mostly provided a good general definition of the concept.

Lead Section
The article on social structure provides an acceptable introductory sentence on the article’s topic, but the structure of the sentence could use improvements to clarify meaning. A sociologist would easily understand the meaning, but a general user of Wikipedia may find the sentence overly technical. This section includes information that does not appear in the body of the article. In the body of the article, emphasis is placed on the distinction between macro- and micro-structure, but the lead section also talks about meso-structures. Although this mention of a third level is brief, it would be better suited in one of the later sections. While the lead section does refer to some of the article’s major sections, the information shared goes further in depth than one might expect from a lead section. Additionally, some of the major sections receive more attention than others, leading to an unbalanced lead section. The lead section is overly detailed and contains information that would be better suited to the major sections.

Content
The article’s content is relevant to the topic but could use updating. I think the article focuses on demographics and resulting class structures in a way that impedes understanding of social structures as patterns within institutions, not just within social class. The article could benefit from expanding on the section that distinguishes institutional from relational structures, as the article heavily focuses on relational structures. It would be beneficial to expand on the types of social structures identified. The article does not deal with one of Wikipedia’s equity gaps and does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Tone and Balance
While the tone of the article is neutral, the article struggles to provide adequate balance between sections and topics. The article spends more time discussing the differences between macro-structure and micro-structure than other types of social structure. While these are two key concepts, I feel it would be useful to elaborate within these sections the different types of structures that can be found, and their implications on society. The article also focuses on the history of social structures rather than giving time to current understandings. This has the effect of overrepresenting historical perspectives and underrepresenting modern ones, leaving readers without the current understanding of what this term means. The article does not explicitly call the modern definitions minority or fringe viewpoints, but it does treat them in such a way that suggests they are lesser interpretations. Rather than summarizing these viewpoints and conceptualizations, the article provides a single sentence per type that does not accurately sum up what is contained in these viewpoints. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader to pay favour to any particular position, but the balance might leave readers thinking that social structure as a term is less relevant in modern sociology and a relic from historical sociology.

Sources and References
Sources are not provided for most of the claims made in the article. Very few sources are provided for the number of claims made, and these sources do not thoroughly reflect the available literature on the topic. Most sources are quite old, and while old sources are not inherently problematic, the issue is that the article uses very few recent sources. The sources are not written by a diverse spectrum of authors, and do not include any historically marginalized individuals. There do appear to be several better sources available that would compliment the historically focused sources in use already, including recent book chapters and recent research into the effects of social structures. Using these sources might help with the balance of the article. Not all the links provided in the reference section work, and some of the references are incomplete. One reference only includes the author’s name and the year, which does not provide enough information for readers to easily locate the work on their own.

Organization and Writing Quality
In some places the article is clear and easy to read, yet in others the writing is sloppy at best and confusing at worst. I did not notice any spelling errors, but I did find many sentences where the grammar obscured the meaning of the sentence. At times the article relied heavily on technical language without explaining the meaning of terms, which could potentially cause confusion for a general reader. I also noticed inconsistencies in the way the article including the term social structures, at times placing it in quotation marks or even bolding the term for reasons that were unclear. I do not feel that the article is well-organized. Some sections could be combined for efficiency, and some should be ordered differently. As I stated earlier, it would be beneficial to add more to modern understandings of social structures. Even if the understanding has not shifted dramatically from what was outlined in the history section, it would be helpful for readers to know what the current discourse is. Another potential section could be including different disciplines conceptualizations of social structures. The category of social sciences encompasses several distinct disciplines, and while they are related, terms can be defined in drastically different ways across fields. For clarity, it would allow readers to differentiate between understandings in disciplines.

Images and Media
The article only uses one image, which I feel is appropriate for its length. The image shows a pyramid of people holding each other up, which I think is helpful for demonstrating how impactful social structures can be. The image also shows how each person in a society is involved, which is another key point in social structure. The image is captioned well, but it could include a bit more information to share what is shown in the image. The caption focuses more on the meaning of the image rather than what is portrayed in the image. The image does not seem to adhere to Wikipedia’s copyright regulations, but the coloration of the image suggests that it might be aged out of copyright. I find that the image is laid out in an appealing way. On my screen it appears to the right of the page in a way that does not break up text or detract from the readability of the page.

Talk Page Discussion
I found that editors in the talk page were noticing some of the critiques that I had when reading. There seems to be a consensus that the page needs to undergo some foundational edits. One editor split the article into social structures and social systems. This could account in part for the disjointed feel of the article and the few references. Several editors noted a gap in representing certain social sciences in the article, and had provided options for addressing this gap, but these changes have not been enacted. The talk page does not have recent activity. The article is rated as a stub-class and is part of two WikiProjects. It is part of WikiProject Sociology and is rated start-class and top-importance. Under WikiProjects Systems it is considered a stub-class article of mid-importance. In class, we have discussed social structures as they relate to systems of knowledge, and we have considered how shifting systems of knowledge are related to changing historical contexts. Similarly, the article discusses the impact of social contexts on social structures. Additionally, the article repeatedly makes link to social institutions that are interconnected with social structures in a way that we did regarding the educational institution. While we do not explicitly name social structures, we do refer to the concept frequently in the course. The article discussed the role of politics within social structures, which we have discussed in class as well. The article tends to focus more broadly on social sciences than sociology, but there are some similarities to how we conceptualize the topic in class.

Overall Impressions
The article’s status is stub-level. Some of the strengths of this article include presenting historical conceptualizations of the topic and providing a clear definition on what the topic is. The article contains some good information, it just requires more citations to enhance the quality and reliability of this information. The article could be improved by altering the layout and structure, eradicating weaknesses in grammatical structures, and adding more citations from recent reliable sources. Once these main concerns have been addressed, I would recommend adding a section about variations in conceptualization across disciplines. Having a generic definition may suit most general readers, but I feel this addition could strengthen the level of information presented in the article. I would argue that the article is under-developed. It is functional for now but could use some heavy revamping.