 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA 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.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia 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.
Sources and ReferencesA 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.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe 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.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA 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. |
Which article are you evaluating?
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.)
Sex work and prostituion have been very heavily gendered, general conceptions of sex work center women as victims of patriarchy and an exploitative society and do little to contextualize what role men play other than purchasers. This article also does not differntiate between sex work and sex exploitation which is outdated and harmful to people who have experiences with one or both of those.
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 article seems to just be outdated and needs to be reworked to reflect modern scholarship and contemporary understandings of sex work. The opening section has a good general overview of male prositution but the historical section needs a lot of work. They make mentions of different culutral examples of prostituion but moralize their examples without honoring culutural context and how understandings expressions of sexuality differ in historical and cultural contexts. The regulations on sex work section needs to be updated and there should be more information about the intersection of male sex work and race.
The sources included on the page are very dated and should be expanded to include more sources from recent scholarship. According to the Talk page, debates on updating language are very contentious. These debates are reflected in the tone of the article that is split between a progressive pro-sex work attitude and a moralizing critique of prostituion.
| Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA 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.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia 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.
Sources and ReferencesA 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.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe 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.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA 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. |
Which article are you evaluating?
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.)
Sex work and prostituion have been very heavily gendered, general conceptions of sex work center women as victims of patriarchy and an exploitative society and do little to contextualize what role men play other than purchasers. This article also does not differntiate between sex work and sex exploitation which is outdated and harmful to people who have experiences with one or both of those.
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 article seems to just be outdated and needs to be reworked to reflect modern scholarship and contemporary understandings of sex work. The opening section has a good general overview of male prositution but the historical section needs a lot of work. They make mentions of different culutral examples of prostituion but moralize their examples without honoring culutural context and how understandings expressions of sexuality differ in historical and cultural contexts. The regulations on sex work section needs to be updated and there should be more information about the intersection of male sex work and race.
The sources included on the page are very dated and should be expanded to include more sources from recent scholarship. According to the Talk page, debates on updating language are very contentious. These debates are reflected in the tone of the article that is split between a progressive pro-sex work attitude and a moralizing critique of prostituion.