User:Vsiguenza/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The article I evaluated was "Exploitation of women in mass media."

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.)

The reason why I chose the article is because of the rise in media violence particularly toward women in a variety of mediums sparked my interest. It matters because it is a prolific issue that influences society's perception of women through the lens of misogyny or sexism. My impression of the article was that the article had multiple subheads that detailed the criticisms of media, from the advertising industry to sexual objectification in video games. The "effects on society" tab was a nice touch because most articles cover the topic but not it's aftereffects in great detail. I think there could have been more images embedded to illustrate the issue at hand.

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.)

The introductory sentence does frame the exploitation of women in mass media effectively, but appears to be slightly overly detailed. The article doesn't necessarily deal with Wikipedia's equity gaps. In the "Soap Opera" section, there is an absence of discussion relating to Spanish telenovelas. Additionally, an outdated article used in 2006 that found "inverse relationships between the frequency of social media usage and the relationships adolescents formed with the impact it had on their sense of self" likely has evolved in today's technological mediated communication.The article is pretty balanced in spite of teetering between the perceptions of the "male gaze" and the "female gaze." There are a diverse spectrum of authors, particularly using peer-reviewed articles from the Right for Equality and Journal of Youth and Adolescence. The links do work. The article is well-organized based on the criticisms of media, effects on society, sexualization of women and counter arguments. The structure is clear and concise. The two images embedded in the article have candid captions but could explain more about the individual featured. Some older conversations in the "Talk" tab suggested changing the tone because it read as favoring the objectification of women in mass media. It doesn't read with that tone now. Others showed how Wiki-Education Foundation supported this course assignment. The article is well-developed, but could implemented more current releases of video games, films or advertisements that readers could easily identify from their media diet.