User:Alyssa.Weaver/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Spotify Wrapped

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am an avid user of Spotify wrapped, and I wanted to do something regarding media.

Evaluate the article
Lead section


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it gives a brief description of what the topic is about.
 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It only includes descriptions of some of the major sections while leaving some out such as the history of Spotify Wrapped.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
 * No it does not include information not present in the article.
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is pretty concise but at the same time giving all the necessary details readers should know before starting on the entire page.

Content


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes the content is relevant. All of the paragraphs are about Spotify wrapped or about the impact it has made in the media.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes the content is up to date. Spotify wrapped has been pretty consistent during the years it was in place, so this was not hard for writers to update.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No I think the article goes into depth at just the right amount. The topic I chose does not require a large amount of information as it is a relatively simplistic idea.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No it doesn't. I am not sure if there would be an equity gap since this is a streaming platform and is based on what others listen to. One thing that the article does mention is how Spotify may be promoting the more famous singers instead of giving the smaller, more undiscovered artists a chance to gain more listeners.

Tone and Balance


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes it is a neutral article. After reading it you would not persuaded in one way or another.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I do not think that there are any biased claims in the article. At points they describe important opinion pieces regarding Spotify Wrapped, but they simply state the facts without any personal opinions.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * They constantly refer to what big media news sites think of Spotify wrapped. This is an important factor to consider, but they may have overused this point.
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * They really do not give any minority viewpoints in the article.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No there is no attempt of persuasion in this article. It simply gives readers the facts.

Sources and References


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes all facts are backed up wit these sources of information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes they all revolve around Spotify Wrapped and the music industry.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes they are all current, the earliest is from 2018, but many come from 2021/2022.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Just from looking at the authors of the sources they seem to have a variety of writers.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * They have some sources that come from tech magazines, and a few of them seem to be of academic articles.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the ones that I clicked took me directly to the source.

Organization and writing quality


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, reading this article was not stressful and easy to read because of how concise it was.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, it seemed professional without any errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, all major points of the topic were covered and organized into their sections.

Images and Media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No there is only one image and it is the Spotify wrapped logo from 2020. There should be more throughout the article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes it was captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Not really. There is just the image of the logo at the top of the page.

Talk page discussion


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There was a conversation thread discussing if there was a better news source to reference within the article. Other than that the talk page is just small edits that are being changed.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It was labeled a good article according to the criteria. It is a part of: internet culture, marketing and advertising, and internet.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia discusses this topic in a more formal manner than how we do. Everybody is working together to create the best article for the world to read and learn from.

Overall impressions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall this was a very informative and interesting article to read. It was not dull and long, but instead concise and every paragraph contained important information. I would recommend others interested in the topic to read it.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Its strength was bringing in the controversial aspects of Spotify wrapped. I am an avid user of this, but I had no idea that this was a topic of conversation, so this interested me.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * They should add more pictures throughout the article as there is only one image and it is of the logo from 2020.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is well-developed, I am not sure what other information I could add to make this article better because all of the bases are covered.