User:Najohnson21/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Home economics

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article as it pertains to the material for my class Foundations of FCS. Although indirectly relating family and consumer science, the 'Home Economics' page is the only wikipedia page containing basic history and information on FCS. My first impressions were that is what very basic and contained very little information on the accurate and deep history of FCS as well as what it has evolved to today.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section:

The lead section's first sentence does a good job summarizing the components of home economics, also known as family and consumer sciences. The lead section also does a good job at summarizing the main points of the article to follow. This section is concise and does not contain any information not further expanded later on.

Content:

The content is relevant to the topic of home economics, however it is very brief, non-exhaustive, and lacking up to date information coincided with basic historical information as well. Most major points have been hit, but information on things such as The Lake Placid Conferences, the training involved, history at colleges, and Home-Houses could be expanded on. There are no major equity gaps, but representation on the history of black women involved in FCS history can be expanded, and less of a focus on outdated misogynistic terms in relation to women and domesticity.

Tone and Balance:

The article in its entirety is balanced and neutral in tone. I was not persuaded to think one way or another about any of the historical events, people, or information. There is an uneven distribution of information, as information about other countries is a minority to information about the United States. There is also an imbalance in information from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries compared to the twenty-first century.

Sources and References:

The information in the article appears to be cited correctly. Each paragraph contains one or more sources, some with more than others. it appears there are no sources cited past the year of 2023, indicating a gap in recent or new information for home economics. Many sources are quite old, or framed form old readings/text. I clicked on one link cited from Iowa State University, but was unable to gain access to the article itself. Most of the links appear to be clickable and send you directly to the source.

Organization and Writing Quality:

The article is written well. I did not identify any major grammatical or spelling errors. The tone is professional and concise. At times a bit too concise and lacks support. The organization is a bit confusing. I think it would be beneficial to organize the United States history first and then place to history and information about other countries last. Of course as information is expanded new se ctions could develop and would need to be placed in a logical spot.

Images and Media:

There are a total of five images on this particular page. Each one appears to follow the copyright guidelines and is cited with a brief description below it. I do not think the particular images enhance any information gain, as many are outdated and focused on the domestic nature of women. It could be of benefit to add pictures of diverse populations, settings, and people involved in the history and present progression of home economics.

Talk page Discussion:

The article has been rated C-Class and recommends edits be made. It is currently apart of five Wikiprojects. Behind the scenes conversations involve: supporting information, college lists, re-inserting relevant links, neutrality, merging with other pages, tone, world-wide history, and updates from the eighteenth century. The way Wikipedia discusses the topic differs from what we have discussed in class. by lacking detailed information on the history of home economics and its evolution in FCS. It also glazes over major events that we have learned hold significantly more history.

Overall Impressions:

The article has been listed as a level-5 vital article. The strengths include the accuracy of information, as well as the organization and historical significance of events described. The article can be improved by substantially adding more information in regard to FCS domains: public health, dietetics, apparel, hospitality, etc. Overall the article is developed well on the basics of home-economics, however it is poorly developed on topics within home economics such as FCS domains mentioned above as well as the history of why domestic science was developed in regard to society at the time. There is also a proposed merger with this page and family and consumer science, and I ind it would be beneficial to separate the pages into two distinct links. Overall, it is a vital article and needs work, but also has a good foundation to begin with.