User:Cmjct11/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Social media use in politics

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I decided to do the "Social Media in Politics" Article because it is something that is still evolving. There are new left-wing and right wing apps that come out every day and with different social movements evolving, there is significant changes to the way we interact with social media through a political lens.

Lead section
The introductory sentence is strong and gets the point across. There is a brief description of the article sections but it both could use some context about the upcoming article and include more apps that are extremely relevant to today. The lead doesn’t include information that shouldn’t be there, I think that it is concise but could still use a little bit of work.

Content
The content is very relevant. I think that the three main parts of the content were broken up nicely and everything can be covered in subcategories under them. The content is not up to date, a lot has changed on social media in 2020. I think that there isn’t any content that “shouldn’t” be there and while there is a lot to be added, I think it can all be done in the subcategories that are already there -- it is well organized and makes sense, there is good bare bones to this article. It has room for it, but I want to add more information on the BLM Movement and police brutality on there, it may need its own sub category.

Tone and Balance
Yes, this article feels neutral. The article talks about the 2020 election, but I think everything said was factual/unbiased. The conservative viewpoint in this case may be seen as “underrepresented” but there was a lot of misinformation in the party so it should be there but brought up properly. I think for what the article has of these viewpoints they are accurately described. There was no point where I thought that the article was trying to persuade.

Sources and References
Yes, it looks like all of the information in the article is cited and factual. I think that the sources are very thorough but because the topic is evolving, there should be more current information added. A lot of the information looks like it is from the 2010s. It seems that there is a wide variety of authors from different demographics. There are a few places where I can add better information, all of the links that I clicked were intact.

Organization and writing quality
The article is very well written and clear, I couldn’t find any grammatical/spelling errors and the breakdown works well for the topic.

Images and Media
There are some useful images (a map) but I think that many more relevant images can be added. What is there is well captioned and it seems that they are cited properly. They look visually appealing and are in the right place, there just should be more.

Talk page discussion
It looks like most who edited this article were also wikiedu students. There wasn’t much there except for a review and a recommendation to add a background section. Wiki just has a “to do list” for the changes we need to make, other than that I’m not sure how it differs from class.

Overall impressions
The article is in pretty good shape, there are just some source, photo and information additions that need to be added. I think it is strong because the information that is there is concise and well cited. The article could be improved by adding more about social media in 2020. I think that this article is underdeveloped because while it has a lot of good information, there is still plenty more that could be added.