User:Kesstiel/sandbox

Queer theory is an important concept missing from much of Wikipedia

Article Evaluation Random LQ Page
Article Homelessness among LGBT youth in the United States


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Everything is relevant, but the formatting is highly distracting. There are massive paragraphs with very few breaks or sub sections.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * There is a great deal of missing information and sub headings that could be added, especially further statistics and connections to other forms of homelessness/poverty. Sources also need to be updated to more recent dates and studies.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes, it is neutral with emphasis on facts that are backed well by valid sources.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Legal ramifications are under represented, but other than that there is consistency in the amount of information present.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Yes and yes, though sources might need to be updated to more recent publications.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Each fact is well covered source-wise, and the information is only biased in the sense that the sources are mostly from queer writers/organizations for a page on a queer issue. This is not bias, per se, as the data is unaffected by it, but there are only a handful of sources used repeatedly. Branching out into more sources would be wise.
 * Now take a look at how others are talking about this article on the talk page.
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are very few conversations, but the agreement is that the page is being represented with very little bias, which is pleasing!
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Rated: B Class. Wikiprojects in: LGBT studies, Sexology and sexuality, Project discrimination, and Project Unites States
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Less emphasis on analysis (which is prudent, because Wikipedia is not an analytical site).

Article Evaluation Egyptian Deities
Article: Ancient Egyptian deities (Specifically Sex and Gender Sub Header)


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Everything is relevant, but portions are inaccurate or unsupported by viable sources. Nothing was distracting.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Some information is incomplete or out of date. There is a lot of information on the queer representation of deities that could be added, as well as the way in which these 'queerer' roles affected how the people lived at the time/expressed their own types of queerness.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * While relatively neutral in terms of the facts presented, there is an emphasis on the heteronormative expressions of the deities.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Viewpoints on masculine and feminine roles are sometimes incorrect (binary) and the diversity in those roles is highly underrepresented.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Some do not work. The sources support the statements, but many are outdated.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Most of the facts are associated with a reliable reference, but some are either missing (according to the Talk tab) or biased due to the time period in which they were written. More information has come out since the late 1900's and early 2000's that needs to be reflected here.
 * Now take a look at how others are talking about this article on the talk page.
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Accuracy seems to be highly emphasized by the authors and contributors, but little to no emphasis on impact or diversification.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Rated FA Class. Projects: Egyptian Religion, Mythology, Religion
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * There is no emphasis on the queer aspects of how sex and gender within the context of religion/the deities affected everyday lives or the lives of religious figures of varying genders and sexual expressions.

Edit to random secondary page: She was later inducted into the World Racquetball Hall of Fame in 2017 for her dominance in outdoor sports.

Potential Edits to the Main Sex and Gender portion of the Egyptian Deities Wiki page:::

The Egyptians regarded the division between male and female as fundamental to all beings, including deities. Some deities were androgynous, but usually in the context of creation myths, in which they represented the undifferentiated state that existed before the world was created (...). Atum was primarily male but had a feminine aspect within himself (...), who was sometimes seen as a goddess, known as Iusaaset or Nebethetepet (...). Creation began when Atum produced a sexually differentiated pair of deities: Shu and his consort Tefnut (...). Similarly, Neith was said to possess male traits and sometimes regarded as a creator goddess, but she was mainly seen as female (...).

Sex and gender were closely tied to creation and thus rebirth (...). Male gods were often connected with kingship and the active role in conceiving children. Female deities were often relegated to a supporting role, often as a constant or encompassing element, stimulating their male consorts' virility and nurturing their children, although goddesses were given a larger role in procreation late in Egyptian history (...). For example, in both the Rammeside and Greco-Roman periods, Osiris and Isis Goddesses acted as mythological mothers and wives of kings and thus as prototypes of human queenship . Hathor, who was the mother or consort of Horus and the most important goddess for much of Egyptian history, exemplified this relationship between divinity and the king (...), although over time she was overshadowed by Isis (...). '''Nut, the sky goddess, is a notable deity and mother figure in history. While most ancient traditions and religions around the world see the sky as a masculine element, Nut was portrayed as female. '''

Female deities also had a violent aspect that could be seen either positively, as with the goddesses Wadjet and Nekhbet who protected the king, or negatively (...). The myth of the Eye of Ra contrasts feminine aggression with sexuality and nurturing, as the goddess rampages in the form of Sekhmet or another dangerous deity until the other gods appease her, at which point she becomes a benign goddess such as Hathor who, in some versions, then becomes the consort of a male god (...)(...).