Evaluating Gender Roles on Wikipedia by sara seaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9 en-us 2018-02-22 22:33:34 UTC 2024-04-19 00:10:25 UTC hello@padlet.com Purpose saraseaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518759 The article I chose, 'Gender Roles' is a very extensive article on the many facets of gender and relates all these back to gender roles. This article meets the three aims of the assignment because it follows Wikipedia's standards for a quality article, besides a few flaws, and gives an example of disagreement on the talk page. ]]> 2018-02-22 22:37:58 UTC https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518759 Quality saraseaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518841  “Evaluating Wikipedia” also gives “Signs of Bad Quality” article.
A. A warning banner at the top.
B. Language problems in the lead section.
C. Unsourced opinions.
D. The article refers to unnamed groups.
E. Aspects of the topic are missing.
F. There are few references and or footnotes.
G. There is hostile language on the talk page.

Wikipedia's "Gender Role" article under section "Theories of gender as a social construct" paragraph 6 end with a claim but then has a little [citation needed] icon. This meets 'signs of a bad quality article' criteria since it is 
C. An unsourced opinion.

]]> 2018-02-22 22:38:16 UTC https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518841 Need for Improvement saraseaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518887 The article has a small sub-section that is a paragraph long titled "Gender roles in family violence" Since there is no Wikipedia article dedicated to this issue I would suggest that the authors consider extending this sub-section.]]> 2018-02-22 22:38:25 UTC https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518887 Talk saraseaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518933 Under the talk sub-section, "Defining gender socialization in the lead section" there is a dispute at the end that does not have any correlation to the section title. Two people are arguing over whether someone is an inexperienced editor and should be allowed to edit the 'gender roles page'.  I chose this example because it was not on the topic, but on the qualifications of the authors.


]]> 2018-02-22 22:38:39 UTC https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518933 Conclusion saraseaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518948 This is a very well written and informative article with minimal signs of bad quality or aggression on the talk page but there is a need for improvement that could be met by extending the sub-section "Gender roles in family violence".]]> 2018-02-22 22:38:44 UTC https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234518948 saraseaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234986247 2018-02-24 14:21:11 UTC https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/234986247 Quality saraseaford https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/237090377 “Evaluating Wikipedia” gives Wikipedia’s standards for a “quality” article. 
A. There is balanced coverage.
B. Clear structure.
C. A lead section that gives an easy to understand overview.
D. Neutral Content.
E.  Reliable sources.

Wikipedia's "Gender role" article follows all these guidelines.

]]> 2018-03-01 18:21:36 UTC https://padlet.com/saraseaford/sh28jdypy6v9/wish/237090377