User:TherealHarv/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Feminist rhetoric

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate Feminist rhetoric because the topic sounded interesting, I feel a personal connect as I am a women, and the topic also relates to the topic of communication. I also feel like the topic is very important still today because we still see inequality between genders which is why I felt so compelled to choose this article. It matters because it helps people better understand and address unequal and oppressive gender relations, through the use of artful speaking and writing. My preliminary impression of the article was that it was quite detailed and easy to understand. I think that all the headers they had all talked about important topics that were needed to fully understand the importance of what was being discussed.

Lead Section
I would have preferred to see some sort of direct definition of what feminist rhetoric is, the introduction talks about what it emphasizes and prioritizes. It also say that it is different from rhetoric feminism but because I as the reader don't have a full understanding of what the definition is of feminist rhetoric is, I feel a bit lost by the time I get to that section of the introduction. The introduction does not give the reader much of an overview of what is going to come further in the article but I feel in this case if it did it might give away too much information and it might be unnecessary to read into the article further if too much was added, I think the information that is currently there is enough adding more could make it overdetailed, all I would prefer be added is a clear definition of feminist rhetoric.

Content
The overall article seems to stay on the topic of feminist rhetoric, and the subsections stay on the topic given in the header, from what I am able to tell the content is up to date, the article was last updated back in June of this year(2022) making me believe that everything has been updated as much as can be. The only thing that might need to be changed would be the caption under the first image, as it doesn't quite describe the picture. The article I believe does deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps solely because it does talk about the feminist movement, along with race and ethnicity. I enjoy that the article gives the readers a section with further readings on the topic so that individuals can do their own research if they desire to do so.

Tone and Balance
The article seems to be balanced and does not show much if any biased that I can detect, I am sure one could say that the article is biased as it only talks about the feminist point of view but that is because that is what the article is discussing and I feel like that is unavoidable in this case. They do added some further readings that people could look into but they don't have any of the work directly linked only some of the authors so I don't feel like that was done with the interest of persuading the reader to read them and pick a side of the topic, but just as a way to get more information on the topic at hand.

Sources and References
There are quite a few references given in the article whether that be to other Wikipedia pages or to outside articles which are cited in the article where needed. The links to the citations work and lead to the articles referenced, they all seem to be current and used to back the information in the article very well.

Organization and Writing quality
I think that rearranging some of the topics could create a smoother way to read the article but it isn't something that must be done. Moving the challenges, application and implications into one single category could make it organized a bit more or adding them to definition and goals in subcategories could work well as they are part of the process of reaching a goal.

Images and Media
As I talked about in the content section the caption on the first image need to be changed a bit so that the reader understand a bit more about the person or why that specific image is important. Not sure if there are much choices for picture for the topic but adding one or two more could add visual context for certain sections of the writing such as adding something to the history section or the applications section would allow for the reader to visualize the topic better.

Talk page discussion
The article is rated with two different ratings one is C-class with a low importance rating and the other is a C-class with a high importance rating. There are two Wikiprojects that are involved on the page. There are no current conversations occurring in the talk page, as it seems like the projects are now finished for the time.

Overall impressions
The article seems like it is currently in a complete status and doesn't currently need to be improved besides the small things I mentioned before. I enjoyed the article and personally think I might do some further digging into the topic to learn more.