User:Abbyhallam003/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Social media use by Barack Obama

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.)

I chose this article because I am interested in social media and how that effects presidential campaigns. This matters because social media plays a huge role in the content society takes in today, as it is one of if not the biggest sources where people get information today. My preliminary impressions of it was how Barak Obama uses/used social media within his presidential campaign when running.

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.)

Lead Section

- Yes, the article lead includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic.

- Yes, the lead includes a brief description of the article's major sections.

- No, the lead does not include information that is not present in the article.

-The lead is concise.

Content

- Yes the content is relevant to the topic.

- Yes, the content is up to date

- No, there is no important content missing or content that does not belong - No, the article does not deal with one of Wikipedia’s equity gaps. It does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Tone and Balance

- Yes, the article is neutral.

-No, there are not any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.

-No, there are no claims that are overrepresented or underrepresented.

-Yes, minority or fringe viewpoints are accurately described as such.

-No, the article does not try to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from one another.

Sources and references

-Yes, all facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.

-Yes, the sources are thorough

-Yes, the sources are current

-Yes, the sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors, it was not possible, so they did not include historically marginalized individuals.

-From what I read/saw, all the sources posted were great and insightful, when digging for better sources, I did not find any that I thought were sufficient enough to replace ones found in there already.

-Yes, the links work.

Organization and writing quality

-Yes, this article is well written

-No, the article does not have any spelling or grammar errors.

-Yes, the article is well organized

Images and Media

-Yes, the article includes images that enhance understanding of the topic

-Yes, images are well captioned

-Yes, all images adhere to Wikipedia’s copyright regulations

-Yes, all images are laid out in a visually appealing way.

Talk Page Discussion

-The only behind the scenes conversation that I saw on the Talk Page was a concern about Barack Obama using a blackberry in the early days of smartphones and if that held importance in this article.

-This article has been rated as a good article as thanks to an edit after April 2023 for bad grammar and spelling issues.

-The way Wikipedia discusses this topic differs from the way discussed in class with relation to less theory related content in the article as seen in class.

Overall Impressions

-The status of this article is in good shape after edits made and checked by many authors from the history of editing.

-The articles strengths are those related to the organization of the article, each section split into each social media platform used and with concise detail. It was easy to follow along.

-The article can be improved just by updating any useful information from Obama’s recent social media if that plays a key role to be integrated in the article where it seems fitting.

-I would assess the article's completeness by stating that it has been developed well and with intent. The article is detailed, up to date, and concise.