User:Mylessj/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Gender studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article on 'Gender studies' to evaluate as this is an interdisciplinary academic field that I not only find interesting, but also started taking elective courses in throughout this past semester. This article matters because it is important for people to have access to background information on academic courses. Whether it is seniors in high school trying to learn more about potential courses they will be taking for their programs, or current university students like myself wanting to know more about current and future courses, having this ressource is very helpful. My preliminary impression of this article was, "yes that sounds about right", as the first few sentences correlated to what I believe is the base definition of 'Gender studies'. With a quick overview of the whole article, I also found how the contents of the article was divided quite interesting as well.

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.)

An interesting article on a current academic field that I am taking courses in, here are a few comments on the article to consider:

Content


 * While reading the 'Psychoanalytic theory' in the Influences section, I felt there could be more clarification with some of the terms used. For example, "borderlinking (bordureliance), borderspacing (bordurespacement) and co-emergence.". Perhaps with the use of footnotes, or a WikiLink on the exact words. I also understand this could be just a quick google search, but when reading a Wikipedia article I always enjoy the option of directly clicking on the terms given, and being transported to its own Wikipedia article.
 * I feel like a section that touched on the impact of this academic field could be a good idea, as it was mentioned how this area only grew popularity in the 1990s - not sure if this would just be an article on its own though

Tone and balance


 * In terms in balance, I felt as though I was wanting to read more about certain sections. Specifically, in the Development of theory section, 'Women studies' in comparison to 'Men studies' seems like it is missing more history or context surrounding the topic.
 * As well as 'State and governmental attitudes to gender studies', although this section may not be the most important to the topic, it felt like each subcategory (each country mentioned) was missing information, perhaps on how this affected students or their own communities.

Sources and references


 * Only thing I noticed were the few names found that I am assuming, no longer has a page linked to it, but appears like it should. Removing those links, or finding one to add for, Jane Flax, Bryan Palmer and Jayson Harsin would be a good idea.

Organization and writing quality


 * Organized pretty well, the only area that was a little bothersome to me (this could just be biased to how I read things), was the 'Feminist psychoanalytic theory' subcategory in Influences, felt that the divisions of sentences made it seem choppy and again feel like it was missing content. Not sure if there would be a way to condense or add more content to these areas.
 * Again some of the terms used could be clarified, as it is not clear to readers unfamiliar to this subject what they all mean.

Images and media


 * Hard to find pictures on the topic of an academic field I suppose, but perhaps pictures relating to the many names mentioned, or the different theories mentioned could be interesting. Enjoyed the one picture of "Picketing against "gender ideology" in Warsaw, 2014".

Talk page discussion


 * The talk page for this article provides some good feedback, many of the same comments that I agree with and/or have mentioned in this evaluation. Helpful to the original author(s) of this page.

Overall impressions


 * All in all, this article feels as though it is missing some vital content in certain areas. It proves to provide some great base information on the topic, although could use some organizational and reference editing.