User:Rjgiannelli415/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Slut-shaming
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it is related to gender and sexuality studies and it interests me as a term because of its common colloquial use.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, but I wish the Lead went a little more into how society plays a role in slut-shaming (i. e. media).
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, most of the article's sources are from the 2010s. The page was last edited on October 22, 2019.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The article seems thorough and contains relevant information throughout.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article appears to be neutral, focusing largely on research from multiple independent sources.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No (besides the general idea that most slut-shaming is bad).
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The article expresses the view of slut-shaming as both a form of social critique and reclamation of the word "slut."
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Not really. The article presents victim blaming as a bad thing, but I would hope that many people do not hold the position that victim blaming is good.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * This article makes good use of citations for most information in the article. The entire last section ("Among gay and bisexual men") is missing citations throughout, though.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The article makes use of a wide variety of sources, including a good variety of research studies.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of the sources are from the 2010s.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Most of the links work. At least one link in the citations did not work, though.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Most of the article is easy to read, with minimal errors. Some paragraphs are choppy, though, such as paragraph three in the "Definitions and characteristics" section.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No clear grammatical or spelling errors were noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is well-organized. It is arranged into sections, including: Definitions and characteristics; society and culture; activism; and among gay and bisexual men. The society and culture section is also broken down into more specific sections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Only two images are used. One is for the article being part of the "feminism" umbrella and the other relates directly to the topic of the article and is used appropriately. The article could use perhaps one or two more images, especially images directly relating to slut-shaming.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Only the image specifically related to the article is captioned, and it is well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * The images appear to adhere to the copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, but more images would be useful and would require more though in their layout.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Some people on the talk page suggest that this article be merged with the "slut" article, which I think is a valid argument. While some argue that slut-shaming belongs on Urban Dictionary and not Wikipedia, many argue that the topic is important enough to warrant an article on Wikipedia.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article is C-Class for Discrimination, Feminism, Gender Studies, Sexology and sexuality, and Sociology WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This article describes slut-shaming as a process of reclamation of the word "slut" by women, but also describes it as being harmful to women and a form of victim blaming, which is interesting because slut-shaming usually has negative connotations (such as being a type of victim blaming).

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * This article has been nominated for deletion or merging, but it is currently viewable as its own page.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article gives a concise overview of an important topic within feminism. The structure is good and it uses a variety of sources.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * This article can be proofread for readability. Some sentences, though grammatically correct, are choppy and abrupt to read. Additionally, quite a few quotes are used throughout, which could be paraphrased to provide more analysis and information about the topic than just what one person is saying. The entire last section about gay and bisexual men also needs citations throughout.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is fairly well-developed, but some time could be dedicated to analyzing quotes or expanding on the section about gay and bisexual men. The article could also better-develop the idea of heterosexual men not facing slut-shaming more, which is so important in uncovering the origins and history of slut-shaming. Overall, the article is a work-in-progress, but it is on the track to being a good article.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: Talk:Slut-shaming There is no discussion on this talk page, so I did not leave a question.