User:Rashanmarcus/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Psychological effects of male infertility

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 to evaluate this article originally, because I wanted to know more about this topic. I thought that I would gain more knowledge in an area that affects a marginalized community.

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 of the article informs the reader that the article is about male infertility, and how infertility has psychological effect on men akin to that of women. The lead section also clearly states what each section will be about without adding in unnecessary information. The articles information is up to date and is relevant when it comes to men’s issues and social disparities that can be found when looking at men in a patriarchal society. There do seem to be missing information and a lack of information about how groups that men can attend. The history of the subject and research pertaining to the subject seems to be missing also. The tone of the article is seemingly neutral and show that there is a bias against men when it comes to infertility, due to there being little to no research about the topic. The articles viewpoint on research in this area does seem to be accurately displayed and show a social bias towards men when it comes to infertility and the lack of research. Readers could feel as though they are being persuaded to believe that there is an injustice toward male infertility and the effect of infertility places a harsher view towards infertile men. The article is backed by facts, although the information needs to be updates, due to recent findings after Covid19. There are better sources that could enhance the readers expectations and knowledge on the information provided. The links provided do not work and reverts to the current article. The article is well written and organized very well and lack grammatical and spelling errors. The sections are broken down well and reflect the points of the main topic of the article. This article did not have any related images or media. The article did not have any talk or discussion pages and was rated as low on the project importance scale for sexology and sexuality, and also low for psychology project importance scale. The overall status of the article is C – class men’s issue article that is low on both psychology and sexology and sexuality articles. The strength of the article is that it starts the conversation, but it forces you to due your own research to find information and sources that increases your overall knowledge. This article is currently underdeveloped and needs more sources and citations.