User:Skymcm2015/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Body shaming

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I decided to choose this article because it seems to be very underdeveloped. I was also interested in this topic because it could be directly related to body image and social stigmas that could contribute to mental illnesses as well.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

The lead sentence defines the topic. There is not really a lead section. The article doesn't have separate sections so it does not summarize. It is concise but maybe a bit too concise.

Content

There is just overall not much content in the article but what is included does seem to be relevant. I think that the last section about the negative effects should definitely be developed a lot more, as well as the section where they spoke about the history of the topic.

Tone and Balance

I don't think that the article is biased at all. It seems to be neutral based on the way that it includes all different types of body shaming and never says if one is good or bad. I do think that the implications of it do seem negative but that is just based on the facts of the article.

Sources and References

I think that the sources in the article are good as they are mostly research studies. There is one pop culture new article included that I might would take out but it does illustrate the way the media talks about people's appearances so it may be relevant. The sources are current and there is a good variety. I think that more sources need to be added.

Organization and Writing Quality

The article is clear and concise but there is not enough information. However, the grammar and readability is fine. The article needs sections.

Images and Media

The article includes no images, but some could be added.

Talk Page Discussion

There is no activity in the talk page. The article is a part of the WikiProject Discrimination and WikiProject Health and Fitness. It is a start-class rated article and on the low importance scale.

Overall Discussion

The article has hefty room for improvement. I think the strengths would be the sources in the article being academic sources and the weaknesses would be that there is not enough information pulled from those sources. The article really needs separate sectioning. The article is overall underdeveloped.