User:Aichelemc/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (Problematic smartphone use)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * The use of smartphones has increased drastically over the past ten years and I myself am on my phone but more than I want to be! I first saw behavioral dependence as a group of articles to look into and in that grouping I came upon addiction to smartphones immediately knowing this would be interesting to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

This lead is clear when mentioning that smartphone use can be viewed as behavioral dependence issue. They use their lead properly and mention the main points of the article and how smartphone use affects our daily lives. The psychological health and physical health of those that overuse phones is mentioned in both the lead and the article along with the effects and how to prevent it. There is a mention about the high prices of smartphones which is not mentioned widely later on in the article. I consider the lead concise and detailed to a well written extent; however, I feel there is a bit of an overuse of some words making the lead overall wordy.


 * 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?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content provided in this article is very relevant to the overuse of smartphones with a good amount of coverage on many different perspectives relating smartphones. Most of the content is up to date as things haven't changed majority over the past year or two but over half the references are very dated. All content in this article seems very fitting to the topic. Mentioning how children are being introduced to phones earlier on and the aftermath in that shows how phones are being used in a younger audience. They mentions how those that drive are also prone to using their cellphone which shows it's not just one age group with this problem. The content is very thorough and doesn't seem misplaced.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

I see a bit of bias throughout the article. The author(s) seems to make this a sort of argumentative piece at times. I feel a ton of people that have edited this are passionate about have smartphones have taken over our daily lives and it is shown through some sentences. Of course this is a widely discussed topic throughout the world and it is hard to see some positives in smartphones at time. The article does focus mainly on the issues of smartphone use psychologically and physically so I have a hard time determining whether this is bias or just facts. At times I feel i was persuaded into thinking that smartphones have no benefit but overall i feel the article does a good job staying neutral, with a couple slip ups.


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

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

All facts are backed up with articles that give a wide variety of information. After clicking through quite a few sources they seem to be mainly opinionated blogs. This makes me question how well each source is reliable but a lot of them did say the same thing. There were a few more reliable sources such as news articles or psychologist talking about their view on smartphone usage which i view as more reliable. All sources I click don worked, some from 2013 and some from as recent as 2018.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is clear to read their writing style is very informative and professional. I don't question their ability to write a good paper. There seem some to little spelling errors but according to the talk page the article has been moved around a bit. I would consider this article very organized and to the point. Each topic is clearly separated and easy to find. There are not major issues that i would find crucial to fix. It was well thought out and it is a very thorough paper to use when wanting some knowledge on the overuse of smartphones and its effects.


 * 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

 * Guiding questions

If I were to edit this article myself I wuld definitely add more pictures. There is a good chunk of information and i think it is important to give the readers eyes something to look at and break from each topic. If the eyes are not given a chance to rest the article can seem like a big blur over time. One caption is simply "People using mobile phones" which is followed with a small image and seems a bit misplaced. It is random and not quite relative to the rest of the article. People are smiling at their phones which isn't the tone the article gives off. The image is off to the side and hard to view especially when focusing on all of the rest of the article that takes up 95% of the page..


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There seems to be a lot of movement in the article. People are deleting paragraphs and moving others around fro a more organized piece. The article is a part of three wiki-projects including Addiction and Recovery, Medicine/ Psychiatry, and Psychology. These vary from low importance to class. There are other resources available to look at regarding the same topic that Wikipedia sees as reliable which makes me think this article is not the most reliable. It is a popular topic and it has been used as an article to read in other class assignment which gives it good credibility.


 * 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

 * Guiding questions
 * Overall this article seems complete and fairly strong. It is clearly organized and each topic in the lead is discussed thoroughly and clearly. It has some very good information for someone doing a research paper on the problem on smartphones in today's world. I personally think there needs to be a larger amount of images with much more detailed captions that relate better to each topic. It has clearly gone through a good amount of editing and there resources page has a ton of sources to look at. If I were to change something other than the lack of images I would update some of the sources and consider adding some more reliable ones as well. Removing the blogs and opinionated sources would strengthen the credibility of this article. It is is a well written and thought out piece.


 * 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?

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: