User:Mem0207/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Gender Empowerment Measure


 * Article Evaluation
 * The content is relevant to the topic, and the tone is neutral. Claims have citations, but there is very little variety of sources. The article would benefit from a diversification of sourcing. It does tackle one of Wikipedia's equity gaps -- women. The talk page raises a good point about the page needing many more sections than it currently includes. I think one section that has not yet been suggested, but would strengthen the page a lot, is an "application" or "examples" section. This would include text and/or graphics that discuss or display rankings of different countries, as well as an examples of times that a country has enacted new policy in response to its rating.


 * Sources
 * One source that I think would benefit the page is Dr. Michael Siepel's "Gender Empowerment Measure and Policy Choice," which examines the correlation between GEM and a government's spending priorities. I think the article should include references to work such as this which use the GEM as a tool for important empirical research to talk about the role of the GEM in academia and research efforts.
 * An additional source might be "Critique of Gender Development Index: Towards an Alternative" by Indira Hirway and Darshini Mahadevia.
 * An additional source might be "Critique of Gender Development Index: Towards an Alternative" by Indira Hirway and Darshini Mahadevia.

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Women in conservatism in the United States


 * Article Evaluation
 * I think it is too broad and vague in its description of what it is that conservative women fight for. Other than the abortion question, the article refers very vaguely to what conservative women want as opposed to liberal women or conservative men. The specific niche occupied by conservative women needs to be more clearly identified. Additionally, I think Kellyanne Conway should be discussed either in the section on Trump or the section on 21st-century conservative women. There are concerns on the talk page about neutrality in tone and not enough citing of sources, both of which could and should be addressed.


 * Sources
 * I think this New Yorker article, "Kellyanne Conway’s Political Machinations: Can the first woman to run a Republican Presidential campaign reform Donald Trump?" gives good insight into Conway's influence as one of few prominent women in the GOP. This source would be a good starting point for adding a section on her.
 * Addtitionally, "Conservative Women and Feminism in the United States: Between Hatred and Appropriation" by Françoise Coste may provide overarching context on more than just abortion policy.

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Sexism in American political elections


 * Article Evaluation
 * I think the article is in good shape in terms of the information that is currently there. However, I think it needs to be updated. For example, coverage of female presidential candidates in 2020, as well as the election of female vice president Kamala Harris, should be added. Additionally, I think adding more intersectional data and information would benefit this article. For example, in the section on supply and demand among aspirants, breaking this down by class, race, and education would be interesting and strengthen the article.


 * Sources
 * I would consider adding information from Cambridge University's "Gender Is Not a Proxy: Race and Intersectionality in Legislative Recruitment," which examines over 800 Canadian aspirants for political office, differentiating between white women and women of color. The piece finds that "although white and racialized women aspire to political office at roughly the same rates, their experiences diverge at the point of party selection."
 * Additionally, "The Intersectional Effects of Diverse Elections on Validated Turnout in the 2018 Midterm Elections" by Vladimir E. Medenica and Matthew Fowler might be worth adding as well.

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Homonationalism


 * Article Evaluation
 * Overall, the tone is mostly balanced and objective. The only biased opinions are found in quoted material. However, I would suggest dedicating some more space to the critics of the theory mentioned in the opening section. I think the article would benefit from some images and media. The terrorism section could include photographs of the protests mentioned in its final paragraph. The immigration section could include a figure, table, or graph from the study it cites. These additions would add a strong visual element to the article that is currently lacking. I agree with Thewikiwizard1998's comments on the Ukraine section on the Talk page. Thewikiwizard1998 suggests that additional strong sourcing would benefit this section. I think this is a great recommendation, as the section on Israel, for example, includes different theorists (Shulman, Mikdashi, Puar) and their various reasons for citing Israel as an example of homonationalist practices. As a result, the Israel section comes off as much stronger and more evidenced than the Ukraine section does. The article as a whole would be strengthened by adding more evidence from a wider variety of sources to the Ukraine section.


 * Sources
 * To enhance the section on Ukraine, I would consider the paper "Beyond Western Theories: On the Use and Abuse of “Homonationalism” in Eastern Europe" by Professors Leksikov and Rachok.
 * Additionally, I would consider using "Homonationalism in Europe? A quantitative comparison of the values of Europeans" by Leon Freude and Núria Vergés Bosch.