User:Tprice98115/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)Gender studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.) Frankly, I was trying to find something related to French studies, but ended up picking this because it is of interest and because I could find the link.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead section--it gives a good roadmap of the article, it is balanced in tone and substance. I don't see a Queer Studies heading that is mentioned in the lead section. It has women's studies, men's studies, gender in Asia-- but not a domestic queer studies section.

Content-- The content is generally thorough and certainly relevant. Under History, there is the one-line: "In 2015, Kabul University became the first university in Afghanistan" to offer this. 1) that seems randomly put there. 2) much has happened in Afghanistan in the last several months, and I think this could use an edit. Women are no longer allowed to leave the house, much less anyone allowed to study gender studies. Similarly, this one line seems unconnected to anything else: "Teaching certain aspects of gender theory was banned in public schools New South Wales after an independent review into how the state teaches sex and health education and the controversial material included in the teaching materials."

Tone/Writing style-- The article is well-balanced with its tone. It does not seem to swing to one side. The writing style seems neutral and well positioned to convey information.

Images/Media--there is one photo that's 7 years old but still relates to the work. The international sign for women serves as a Feminism Portal.

Talk Page--the article is rated as C-class. There are a handful of comments. One is particularly "snarky." I thought the page was more readable and complete than the commentators, but Gender Studies is certainly something that brings out strong feelings.

Overall--overall, I thought it was complete, except for the development of a queer studies section (as mentioned above).