User:NNLTMR/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Diversity training

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
When I was looking through the article options I chose to evaluate the article about diversity training because after clicking on the link I saw that it had a good structure though not much development and it would be nice to look through an article with this new lens of exploring wikipedia with an article that looks like its actively being worked on and updated. I also just thought it would be an interesting topic to read about.

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.)

The lead section gives a clear overview of the topic, starting with an intro sentence that describes diversity training and its objectives. This section also gives a mention of the controversial nature of diversity training. This section could benefit from a more detailed description of the major sections that follow to give readers more clarity.

The content is comprehensive and topical to the topic of diversity training. It covers the historical background and the objectives and impact of diversity training. The article also touches on the mixed findings from studies on the actual effectiveness of diversity training. It could also benefit from including more recent data and studies, the most recent reference cited is from 2021 and there are probably more current research and trends available.

The article doesn’t actually mention any equity gaps or underrepresented populations specifically and it might be helpful to bring up efforts withing the diversity training field to address issues related to historically underrepresented groups.

The tone of the article is pretty neutral and feels unbiased. It gives you the intended objectives of diversity training and the challenges and criticisms associated with it. The article stops itself from taking any position of the effectiveness of diversity training and gives readers a chance to draw their own conclusions based on the information given.

The article uses a variety of sources including academic studies, books, and news articles. I think it wouldve been more beneficial to give more specific citations in the test to support the statements as theyre made. The sources are current but like I said earlier there are definitely more current sources available. The article is well organized and has distinct sections that cover a number of aspects from diversity training. The sections flow logically from one to the next and it is easy to follow the content. There are also no images or media elements.

The talk page doesnt have a lot going on or really any ongoing debates on the content of the article. Overall, the article does give a solid overview of what diversity training is and the history behind it and the challenges that come with it. It has a neutral tone but i think the article could be updated with more recent research and studies with intext citations.