User:AstroWiki143/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
Is the content up-to-date?
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Are the sources current?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
Are images well-captioned?
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

What is the article's overall status?
What are the article's strengths?
How can the article be improved?
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Examples of good feedback

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?

Sex therapy

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I chose this article because there is a stigma with both sex, and therapy as individual topics and more so with them combined. It matters because sex is an important human experience for many people and having a safe space to get help with it is extremely valuable and important. My preliminary impression of it was that it was extremely interesting, but I wish there had been more information included.

Evaluate the article

Such an important topic in this article and one that absolutely needs to be talked about more in society. I would have liked to see more information in some areas that I think would have been useful, and overall, more mention of female symptoms and dysfunctions. I'm going to go section by section for the sake of ease and organization.

First paragraph
- Inclusion of vaginal lubrication in the list of different dysfunctions
- Inclusion of low libido or hyposexuality in the second part of the second sentence
- Inclusion of culture and religion in last part
Practice
- Inclusion of medications that help female sexual dysfunctions in the first paragraph- Or possibly moving that information into the section regarding Symptoms.
- Inclusion of female sexual dysfunction in second paragraph as another example of somatic or psychogenic bases
Symptoms
- This section has some great information, but I feel could benefit from it being separated into two or three sections, or for it to be a combined section with more information on the various symptoms, causes behind them, and the different treatment options.
- The second paragraph in this section while important, doesn't really fit in with the Symptoms heading, and I feel might do better in the previous section regarding Practice.
Aging and Sexuality
- I really loved that an entire section was included specifically for older adults.
- When I first read the article, I felt that it was missing a section on younger adults since there was a subsection dedicated specifically for older adults. Don't know if another one needs to be added dedicated to younger adults or if the subsection could be done away with and that information be added with the rest of the main Aging and sexuality heading.
- This sentence was a little confusing- "These physical changes often affect the intensity of youthful sex and may give way to more subdued responses during middle and later life."
  - The way it is worded makes it seem as though the changes older adults experience also somehow had an effect on their younger lives. Maybe it can be reworded something like "After the intensity of youthful sex, the physical changes that adults face as they age may give way to more subdued responses during their middle and later years."
History
- Adding more about the origins of sex therapy would have been very interesting to read, especially to see just how much progress has been made since then, leading up to what know about sex therapy today.
References
- Link for 6th reference, "Sexuality in Midlife and Beyond", does not work.
  - Here is one that worked for me - https://www.health.harvard.edu/healthy-aging/sexuality-in-midlife-and-beyond
- Link for 16th reference, "Sex Therapy: Historical Evolution, Current Practice. Part 1", does not work.
  - Here is one that worked for me - https://www.racgp.org.au/getattachment/0a1e25c2-f979-4e5e-8a7e-875016f30615/Lets-talk-about-sex.aspx