User:Anishioka/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Design studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article on "Design studies" because I am currently studying and working as a communication designer and taking other design courses at Emily Carr. As well, in general, I am interested in all things related to design and something I want to continue learning for a while. My first impression of the article itself was that the content is quite short and its contents are well organized. The small diagram on the right-hand side grabbed my attention as it reminded me of a similar image I recently saw in my Design Futures class, about the intersection of design and socio-environmental issues.

Evaluate the article
The article has a good lead section as it introduces the topic of design studies in a clear and concise manner. The context box right below the introduction is well-organized in a chapter-like format. As well, the context chapter uses hyperlinks which allows users to jump to whichever section of the article they are interested in reading. The overall content is relevant to the topic and up-to-date, as the page was last edited on 30 December 2021. Furthermore, the content addresses topics related to historically underrepresented populations, particularly in the “Decolonising design” chapter discussing colonial and dominant design practices as well as alternative approaches. Regarding the tone and balance, the article is written from a neutral point of view as all statements mentioned reference reliable sources.

Although the content is up-to-date and there is variety within the authors and their ideas, the sources and references aren’t as current since most of the sources were published in the late 1990s and early 2000s. In fact, the most recent source dates to 2018, which could potentially explain why the design concepts explored in this article are rather general and nothing too new. Furthermore, some of the sources are only accessible after purchase, which is a bit confusing as readers would need to pay in order to check the reliability or contents of these sources.

The writing is clear and well-organized as in-text citations are completed and offer smooth transitions throughout the reading. This article includes a single image, which I think was a great choice as it relates to the design practice discussed in this page. The diagram is also well-captioned and embedded at the top of this article, so it can be referenced throughout the text.

Reading through the article’s talk page, the discussions among other Wikipedia editors include questions about the qualification of some of the cited sources as well as feedback on the amount of information written in the article as being too much. Another user commented on the lack of hyperlinks for sources, which I believe that one of the editors of this article responded by including all hyperlinks to other sites and footnotes at the bottom.

Overall, the information delivered through the article is straightforward and well-organized. Considering my own observations as well as the conversations from the talk page, this article can be further developed and improved through reexamining the citations as well as including more up-to-date sources.