User:Sa2001oki/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

 * Gender psychology: Gender psychology
 * I chose to evaluate this article as it is on a topic, "gender" that is significant for us individuals that are a part of a society in which we are treated, in most cases, depending on our gender. Additionally, I chose this article as there is importance in understanding gender and its role in society, as there have been rise in actions to promote gender equality, especially in recent years.

Lead
The Lead includes a general summary of the terms 'gender' and shows its clear relevance to the academic field of psychology. In addition, the major sections that are mentioned later in the article are mentioned and lets the readers know what to expect from the article. Overall, the Lead gives the readers a general understanding of the article's topic and does that in a way that is not too long or overly detailed.

Content
The content of the article is relevant to the topic and follows the order in which it is mentioned in the Lead. The last edit was made on the 12th of September of 2020, therefore the content is presumably up-to-date.

Tone and Balance


The tone of the article is neutral as a result of being based off of multiple sources, however there are some sentences on stereotypes and scientific-based evidence that may cause misunderstandings for some viewers.

Sources and References
There are appropriate references to outside sources however paragraphs that are missing citations can be found. A lot of the sources seem to be from 10 to 20 years ago so the data may be outdated and there seems to be one particular author that is being favorably cited a large number of times. However, there are authors other than that one person so I believe there is no need to worry about the lack of reference to a variety of authors.

Organization


The flow from the beginning to the end is very organised and easy to follow. The main reason is that the Lead introduced the article well. The body is split into a few sub-sections but there aren't too many that it would be confusing for the viewers.

Images and Media
No images.

Checking the talk page

 * There is clear disagreement with the way that the Lead is written from one reviewer. There is also another reviewer who has commented on something that the first reviewer pointed out but there is no more on the talk page. The article is not rated very positively and is rated "C-class".
 * There is clear disagreement with the way that the Lead is written from one reviewer. There is also another reviewer who has commented on something that the first reviewer pointed out but there is no more on the talk page. The article is not rated very positively and is rated "C-class".

Overall impressions


It seems as though the article was reviewed very thoroughly by people who are interested in this topic and are committed to sharing the correct information on this topic. That is why there was harsh, but rational feedback in the talk page. The article can be improved by including more different sources and introducing more about the sub-topics in the article, rather than just mentioning them. The article overall is well-developed, however more improvements could be made in the Lead in a way that the sub-topics are slightly introduced beforehand.

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: