User:Bdokolasa/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article (actual wk 2 assignment)

 * Name of article: Norris Church Mailer
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * It was chosen as a part of my course assignment, and it is relevent because Norrish Church Mailer was married to Norman Mailer, the author of "The Faith of Graffiti."

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The Lead introductory sentence includes her name, the period she was alive, and what she is known for and why she is a relevent figure.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead includes a Contents box that lists and links the major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead only includes information that is also discussed later in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is very concise, but it contains useful information to introduce the reader to the topic.

Lead evaluation
Overall, the Lead is well-written and meets the Lead guidelines from Wikipedia.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article's content provides some background but primarily focuses on her career and and what makes her notable.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The article was most recently updated in July 2019. I searched news after her death and did not find many new resources that might be useful.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * In the "Life with Norman Mailer" section, it seems to be publicly known and significant that their marriage went through some tough times due Norman Mailer having trouble with monogomy, but they chose to work it out and stay together.

Content evaluation
''The content provides mostly complete view of her life and what makes her notable with the exception of a little more detail on her marriage to Norman Mailer. ''

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article has a fair and balanced tone and presents the information in a neutral way.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I did not identify any claims appear biased towards a certain position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There is a quote from Norris Church Mailer on her perspective of her relationship with Norman Mailer, and I don't know if it is absolutely necessary, but it might create a more comprehensive view if one of Norman Mailer's quotes about their relationship was also included.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader to take a position on any part of the article.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the information is presented in a "just the facts" kind of way that doesn't try to influence the reader's opinion.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * I reviewed the online sources and they look credible. All statements throughout the article are cited.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Many of the sources cover large parts of Mailer's life and seem detailed. I did not have access to the ebook or Belle's Letters, but they look appropriate to use.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources appear current. There doesn't seem to be as much written about her since her death.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * I clicked on all the links and they work.
 * I clicked on all the links and they work.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources are credible and all statements are verifiable.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * All of the above! the article is accessible to anyone. The syntax creates a nice flow. I did not know anything about Norris Church Mailer before reading the article, but I was able to develop a clear picture very easily.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There are minimal grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is organized in a way that makes sense to understand the chronology of her life and the most notable parts of her life.

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article made sense to me and helped me easily gain an understanding of her life and accomplishments.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article includes one image of Mailer later in her life.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The caption is detailed and includes Mailer's name, the location where the picture was taken, and the year it was taken.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * The image comes from Wikimedia Commons and is allowed for use in the article.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The image is in a helpful place. It is in the infobox that includes basic information about her birth, death, spouses, and children.

Images and media evaluation
''It seems like most biography pages I've looked at only have one image, so this article is in line with the norm. The picture is useful and placed in an appropriate place.''

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Most recently, there has been discussion about the order of the major headings. It sounds like that the original order had her life with Mailer before the section on her early life. It was reordered to be in chronological order.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as "start class" by several WikProjects, including Women's History, Biography, United States / Arkansas, Journalism, and New York City.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not specificially discussed Norris Church Mailer as she relates to "The Faith of Graffiti." The article follows Wikipedia guidelines for biographies.

Talk page evaluation
The article can be expanded upon to provide further details about the impact of her professional work and her life with Norman Mailer, but it currently provides and accurate overview.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is rated "start" class by several WikiProjects, and it has a "low importance" evaluation by all of them except the Biography WikiProject, which hasn't evaluated its importance.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article appears to have few grammatical errors. The neutral tone and simple language makes it helpful and easy to access for most readers. The article is concise but provides a complete picture of her life and what makes her notable.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The Categories list could be lengthened to include labels like "Models," "Women Writers," or "Actresses by certain town or city in the United States."
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is well-developed and provides a well-rounded description of her life and accomplishments. Several topics are linked for readers to learn more.

Overall evaluation
The article has a good foundation, and it is in a place where details can be expanded upon to provide a more layered understanding of her life.

Updating Article

 * 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:Norris Church Mailer

Evaluate an article (first/wrong attempt, but good practice, and an article I'm considering for my personal project!)

 * Name of article: Visual communication
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article, because visual communication is often used a sole means for communicating digitally, and it is often used to complement written digital communication making it relevant to this course. As I read the article, I also immediately noticed some areas that could be improved.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead sentence provides a clear but broad idea of what the topic is and what it means.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead does not describe the articles major sections. There is a Table of Contents box after the Lead, but I do not feel that all the section headers have a clear title.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead lists types of visual communication that are not referenced again throughout the rest of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * If anything, the Lead is too concise, because it does not include enough information about what the rest of the article entails.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * One type of visual communication not mentioned that is very popular today is the use of infographics to visually display and communicate a variety of data and information.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The article briefly mentions body language, gestures, film, and animation as forms of visual communication, but the article does not go into detail about them. The article provides much more information on images, PowerPoint, and other 2-D forms of visual communication. Additionally, the last two sentences in the "Study" section feel out of place and should either be moved to another section, such as the Overview, or removed. The "Study" section is only two sentences without those other two, so it may not warrent its own heading.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * There are pros and cons listed for different types of visual communication tools, and since they are not cited from a research based source, it seems like they could be based on opinion.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The statement that says (without a citation) that "Social media is one of the most effective ways to communicate," shows bias.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There are no viewpoints that seem over- or underrepresented, but the article focuses heavily on using visual aids for presentations compared to other types of visual communication.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * There are several points that have not been cited. For example, the entire "Visual Elements" section only contains one citation and some of the statements border on opinion.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * For such a broad topic, there are not enough sources referenced to make the article feel credible.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The few sources that are used seem current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links I tried work. However, I found that the information on the Eyes of Horus seem to have been taken word for word from the original source.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * I personally feel that the article does not have a very clear flow to it, there are sections that feel wordy, and the headings are unclear.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There are no major grammatical or spelling errors that jumped out at me after reading it a couple of times.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Significant discussion on some types of visual communication are lacking such as more information on their use in advertising, body language and gestures, and infographics.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article includes an image labeled as an infographic, but infographics are not discussed in the article. Another sketch image of the visual communication process is very difficult to follow, and a "process" is never discussed in the article. There is also an image of the Eye of Horus, which is referenced as the symbol for visual communication in the article. For an article on visual communication, it feels like there should be more examples of visual communication types and styles.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * No, the infographic is labeled as an infographic but someone might not know what that means. The image of the sketch of the visual communication process is called "Image showing the visual communication process" which might be helpful if the article discussed the process. The Eye of Horus is labeled as such and is adequate, but it might be clearer if a colon was added with "the symbol of visual communication."
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images are rather small, especially for the fine detail included in the first two images, but they can be enlarged.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Recent suggestions on the talk page include adding more history of how visual communication has changed over time, adding more reliable resources ot the visual elements section (which I had also noted), and adding more reliable sources to the overview section.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is flagged for needing additional citations for verification. It is a part of three WikiProjects including WikiProject Graphic Design, WikiProject Media, and WikiProject Systems.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not talked too much about visual communication yet, but this article primarily focuses on using visual communication in presentations, and we will be talking more about its use in digital media.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is rated "start" class/high importance by several WikiProjects
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article briefly touches on many types of visual communication which is a good start. The "See Also" section provides several useful links for readers to learn more.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I would agree that a history of visual communication would help the reader understand how integral it is to our ability to understand new concepts and ideas. Expanding on how visual communication is used in other areas besides presentations, such as digitally, theater, self-expression in art, would make this a more comprehensive article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is underdeveloped in many areas of visual communication.

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:Visual communication