User:TaylorxChase/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Talk:Eugenics

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this articile because we are discussing this topic in my Child Psychology class here at UNO. According to this Wikipedia article, 'Eugenics' is defined as "a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population." This definition also aligns with the discussion we had in class with Professor Chris Harshaw. The discussion of Eugenics matters because there are many different opinions on the topic. This is due to the fact that in order to apply Eugenics to a human population, reproduction would need to be rearranged within a group and allow desirable heritable characteristics to occur. Some people believe that this could cause discrimination within the human population. This article actually stuck out to me because as I was reading it, I encountered a section where the editors got into a bit of a "editing war". Not sure if it can really be called this, but I do not have a better term to offer. It appears that some editiors within this article have some disagreements as to what is being discussed in the article. There also seemed to be "personal attacks" the had been removed and there is a discussion of the "use of pronouns" towards the end of the article. It just makes me wonder why the editors chose this topic to discuss if they felt like they were not on the same page in regards to the issue? Then again, we are supposed to be neutral on Wikipedia. However, the conversation seems like the editors were perhaps 'picking sides'.

Evaluate the article
I would like to begin my evaluation of this article by saying that it is entirely all over the place and just bad. There is nothing interesting or eye catching in regards to the lead section. Judging by the Talk Page portion of this article, it seems that there may have even been a disagreement on to what the first sentence of the article should be. The editors could not get themselves on the same page when writing this article. It is short and only goes as far as defining what Eugenics is. There is no real or concrete information in this article that would help someone understand or study Eugenics. On top of the content being scarce, the editors thought it more important to brawl over what information should be in the article. They also took it upon themselves to have a bickering match about the use of pronouns and "being called out". The use of sources and references is shot-y, images and media are no where to be seen, organization and writing quality are poor, and the Talk Page is embarassing to read. My overall impression of this article is that it is the perfect example of what NOT to do on Wikipedia. Even Wikipedia thought the article was bad because they de-listed it.