User:Sodafloats/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Stop the Church

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate Stop the Church because it is a C-class Wikipedia article that is directly about historical LGBT issues. It involves the position of the Catholic Church against condom use despite their effectiveness in preventing the spread of AIDS, and the Church's position on sex education. Multiple activist groups organized a protest against the Catholic Church that made headlines around the world, making this undoubtedly a historical moment in AIDS activism.

Evaluate the article
I found that the article had a clear focus on the key events and effects of the protest. I also felt that the article gave a fair overview of the many perspectives on the event, from the position of the Church and Cardinal O'Connor, to those who were at the protest and supported the actions that were taken, and those who believe the Church needed to change but that the protest was too disruptive. One point that confused me while reading was the view held during the planning of the protest, by some members of ACT UP, that activists should not target worshipers; it's unclear in what way worshipers were targeted, though I agree that they were likely offended by the action and this would be more accurate language. Nonetheless, there is a balance in the description of views towards the protest.

The links in the references seem to work, but a small correction needs to be made for the page number on the 2nd citation (from p312 to p. 312). Some sentences cite the same reference twice (ex, "Stop the Church was held on December 10, 1989..." cites the same Salon article twice.) There are biased references as well, but they do not affect the neutrality of the article and are used to give quotes or data about the event, like the date of the protest.

In the talk page, users are discussing whether or not the line about the desecration of the Eucharist belongs in the lead section. The conversation seems to have concluded in favor of inclusion, perhaps because of the shock this action by activists must have generated.