User:Roo Moran/Evaluate an Article

Article: Boygenius (C-Class Article)

Overall, the information in the article already was relatively well written. I think providing most of the information in chronological order was a great form of organization. There are a few small corrections I would make; the first being that I would move the section on their name's significance closer to the beginning, maybe under the lead section or in the section about their formation. I also think that section is too lengthy. While it is relevant to their page, I don't think that there needs to be so much detail, or have its own section. Another short correction I would make would be in regards to their current hiatus. They discussed their hiatus in more detail during their Grammy acceptance speeches, giving more details on their original intentions with their project "The Record". I believe this should be included on their page.

However, the biggest issue I find with the article is the lack of information on sexuality and their involvement with the LGBTQ+ community. All three of the band members are queer, each with a different sexual identity. They are very vocal about this and how it impacted their experiences growing up and their beginnings in music. They have even gone as far as to express their queerness with each other on stage. They are big advocates for queer love, specifically with friends. I feel as though this is big topic to include in their wikipedia page, as media and pop culture has been increasingly more accepting in their consumption of queer media recently, and boygenius has been largely influential for a lot of queer youth.

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

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.)

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.)