User:LettuceBegin/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Individualism

Individualism

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 as a Social Science educator and historian I want to understand social theory and practicum because it matters to understanding human interaction as a historian, but also creates a deeper understanding for me towards the world as an educator for my students. The preliminary impression was that the article was written really well and concise, I feel like if I was in high school I would understand the topic easily. I enjoyed that they defined individualism and when the term began, the history behind it, and the different theories that it branched into towards the end of the article.

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.)

Lead Section:

The lead introductory statement is really well done, it briefly introduces all body explanations while drawing a definition for individualism in a concise way.

The lead does not include a brief description, however on the right there is an interactive key terms hyperlink section which offers a content table of sorts.

The lead is concise, however it feels like it was forced to be concise, the first few sentences feel like word vomit as they are worded with as many keywords with as little word count as possible was my impression.

Content:

The content is relevant and up to date, and has become an expansive resource for understanding individualism, it has evolved from a social theory into practices developed by societies and organizations, the content all ultimately ties back to the lead section. Where the further down you go it allows you to see more sophisticated and complex applications of individualism.

Tone and Balance:

The article appears neutral, covering anarchism, liberalism, and philosophical individualistic theories which showed views of psychologists from Russia, Germany, and other European nations as well as contemporary theorists from United States of America and Canada.

There is an inherently longer portion of egoism in this document than humanitarianism or other relevant beliefs located near egoism. There appears to be a hyper focus here. The article does not attempt to place a direction in the readers mind, instead the article seems to offer individualism as a branch to modern systems as well as ancient beliefs and early psychological studies.

Sources and References:

Yes all facts are represented by relevant source. At first I was worried to fall into a wikipedia rabbit hole of other links to nowhere, however the sources were easily accessible and able to be verified within a few minutes for the few I tried to research.

Some of the sources are current, including contemporary philosophers, theorists, and ideas that exist today, however other sources are dated due to originality of information, the egoism and anarchical egoism sources are a couple decades older than libertarianism sources.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The article was easy to read in the beginning, however the further you go the theories and political ideologies begin to grow more complex and the academic language that begins to get thrown around can confuse people (me) and cause a potential inaccessibility when discussing these topics to those not situated in academic higher learning or literacy. The article is however broken down into sections of complexity, it seems as the further down you go it becomes chronologically more contemporary which would make sense as to why the applications and examples are just as complex because of the modern applications.

Overall Impressions:

The articles overall status was extremely informative and accessible all things considered, I have become more curious to the framework of Wikipedia and how these articles are evolved by groups of people. The articles strengths are that it covers a wide variety of the evolution of individualism theory and how we have developed socio political organizations that support aspects of individualism. However the articles weakness is that the further down you go the harder the text is to read and I felt myself re-reading anarchical ego-ism and solipsism, I believe philosophical jargon makes things way more inaccessible to people who have not taken courses on philosophical theory. I believe the article is complete so much so that it has caught up with todays application and infrastructure of individualism and in order for it to be incomplete would require a newfound evolution or a sprouting organization which seeks to alter the definition or perception of individualism and may even develop intersectionality between socio-economic and socio-political ideologies where individualism is more complex as we continue to evolve alongside it. Ultimately I would attempt to improve this article by finding ways to make it easier to comprehend for those in high school who are probably entering the realm of philosophy and deep thought regarding individualism, in the beginning it felt readable, however as I got to the bottom someone with a Bachelor's in History I still had to take my time to re read a few sentences to ensure comprehension.