User:Birenn/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.


 * Digital media
 * I just feel like this topic can be answered in one sentence, but at the same time is so complex that this page could be one of the longest.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The first sentence is very concise, However it could use a few more words to make it seem a but clear. "encoded in machine-readable formats" is a perfect way to explain it. The second sentence does a really good job at a brief description because it not only talks about viewing the media but also how it can be created and distributed. The sentence even seems to be inclusive in the description. The only two words in the lead are digital media and it does serve both words.


 * 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 is sort of relevant. Let me start off by the one section called digital computers, after seeing it I thought there would then be further sections of other digital media outlets. Im sure you could even add stuff like SVOD as a content creator section for digital media, alongside other ways of creating the content. There then is a section about individual as content creator which needs some expanding. It has a few sentences but I think if I put some information about with numbers or analytics of Youtube, Insta, TikTOk or stuff like that just to show more individual content. There is a disruption section that I also think could be made greater with the amount of brick and mortar retailers closing, certain older media outlets shutting down.


 * 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
 * The article is absolutely neutral. At times I was thinking theres a bunch of negativity in this article! Which is not true because the sections of its negative impact are small, but scientific and it is always important to expand on both sides. I think the article needs some more information and less of the impact of digital media. In order to have a large section of impact I think its important to expand on the topic itself so the public actually knows how big and large the digital media industry is.


 * 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

A lot of scholarly books and textbooks are used to get the information. When looking at the list, the authors also use The Guardian, New York Times, and various pieces of international Universities. All of the sources are also very related to the topic. Most of the sources either already have the words digital media in them, and have various opinions. There are some articles that talk about the negatives while there are others that relate science, technology, and literate into digital media. It seems heavy amount of the work comes from the years published 2014 and 2015. With one article as old as 1945 and the most being between 2013-2016, the links work very well.


 * 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

It is not as clear as many other wikipedia articles. I understand not everyone is going to be reading about the digital media page, celebrity pages sometimes are more clear for the public to read and I think following that style might help if we are talking about topics like YouTube and social media and such. I do not see very many grammar errors however the article needs to be organized Better. I think there can be a few sections and sub sections that would make it more clear. The sub sections then need to be expanded more and I will be doing research for that.


 * 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

The article lacks images. There is one picture that seems relevant but could be better on the top of the page and then one that just seems like a Wiki marketing stunt. I think it would be better to include a picture in each section (maybe not all). For the computer section, put in a picture, add a picture for the multimedia section. If I talk about YouTube, another SVOD, or social media maybe having a logo picture would help or something analytical from the websites. The image included is captioned well, and adheres to the regulations.


 * 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 is only one talk, which is to expand on the negatives of children and digital media. Which should be done in the education of digital media page not this one. She also makes a comment on how we should expand on the political digital media side. We usually think much higher in class than this person


 * 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

The status is that it needs some imrovement. The strengths are talking about the history and getting into detail like coding and such. There needs to be bit of more organization in the article. The article is developed absolutely however there would be more impact if we had some more sub sections of information.


 * 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: Birenn (talk) 17:20, 12 February 2020 (UTC)birenn]]