User:Angiexrm/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: Fear of missing out
 * I chose to work on this article because I'm interested in learning more of FOMO as I seem to have it sometimes and I know a lot of other people who also have it more severely and I want to learn why it's a thing and to be able to gather enough information so that the article is not misleading or persuasive.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? It has a brief description of two out of the three major sections, it does not introduce the pop culture section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, it all seems relevant. Though there are some things that seem to be too much information.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? No.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? It's a persuasive article at some points. A lot of the sentences say that something has been "proven" with no actual proof in the article to back it up. Words were used such as "could be, can be" and others but for the most part it feels like it's trying to persuade to the reader that FOMO depends on how a person uses social media and how it makes them susceptible to develop FOMO.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Yes, when talking about how social media affects FOMO.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Yes.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Not all are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Some.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? not concise, but all good grammar and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Only some grammatical errors, everything is spelled right.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes.
 * Are images well-captioned? They could be better captioned, too much information on the smartphone image.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? In the past few months sections have been edited for grammar and spelling as well as editing and deleting edits, also edits to avoid plagiarism. They have talked about how and when exactly FoMo came as a term and to make sure the source proves the claim. There was also a section on Critique for Media Literacy, I'm assuming it's from the last person who took this source and they pointed out how many paragraphs had one source for each of them with the sources being difficult to get into for validation as well as some having little information on FOMO.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is part of four WikiProjects. It is rated C-Class, Start Class, Mid Importance and Low Importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I guess Wikipedia gives you a better perspective on what's really going on in the article, to see the talk page difference from a draft talk page to a real talk page a=is much more different, but gives me more insight.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? 6/10
 * What are the article's strengths? Lead is good and the History has enough information to get its point across.
 * How can the article be improved? I feel like other aspects can be put into the article not just the main three major subjects.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? it's under 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: Talk:Fear of missing out