Talk:Clitoral pump

Is it possible to add more of the history of the uses and the way to use this pump? Lead Guiding questions Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does. Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes it does. Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes it does, the rest of the article does not include a section on the use. Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise. Lead evaluation Content Guiding questions Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes it is. Is the content up-to-date? Yes it is. Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There could be a section on uses and different platforms that the pump has been used in. Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Not really but there is a place for that to happen. There could be more inclusion in how this toy is used in BDSM. Content evaluation Tone and Balance Guiding questions Is the article neutral? Yes. Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not really but they could add in references to what uses this toy has had historically. Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No. Tone and balance evaluation Sources and References Guiding questions Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Not really, there is only one source. Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? No, they could add much more references and sources. Are the sources current? No, they are over 10 years old. Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? It does not seem so. Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they do but the links are not accurate sources. Sources and references evaluation Organization Guiding questions Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes it is concise and easy to read. Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No. Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes other than the lack of historical use. Organization evaluation Images and Media Guiding questions Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes but they should include more mainstream images with different types. Are images well-captioned? No. Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I believe so. Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes. Images and media evaluation Checking the talk page Guiding questions What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There are no conversations. How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes it is but it is rated very low. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Not much difference. Talk page evaluation Overall impressions Guiding questions What is the article's overall status? It pretty good. What are the article's strengths? It is concise and has a good amount of resources for different types. How can the article be improved? It needs to have better photos and better inclusion of the history and ways it has been used. How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is pretty good but still a little underdeveloped.Kocurran1123 (talk) 19:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)