User:CoastVibes/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: Virtual YouTuber
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Virtual YouTubers are a very recent phenomena and a lot of my friends have been watching them as well as myself on occasion. I wanted to know more about the history of Virtual YouTubers and what they are in a more concrete sense.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No it doesn't.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise, but in my opinion it is too short and is more of a quick summary rather than a lead to a wikipedia article.

Lead evaluation
Overall I believe that the article has a decent lead but it could be expanded upon.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes what is there is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the newest sources cited are from July of this year while the oldest sources is from 2018.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * It has the most essential information but in my opinion it is missing the cultural effects of virtual youtubers both in Japan and abroad.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It does not.

Content evaluation
The content that is there is current and correct from my understanding, but I believe that it could be expanded upon and include more specific details regarding Virtual YouTubers.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes it is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No there is not.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I believe that they must represent the viewpoint of being a virtual youtuber and some of the issues that they might face such as doxing or harassment.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No it does not.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article presents information in a very factually based fashion, but I believe that it tells a perspective of consumers who watch virtual youtubers and does not talk about some of the issues that virtual youtubers face.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * I believe so since there is not much in terms of academic paper available on this topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes they are all within a few years of current day.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * There are instances where the sources link to YouTube videos as well as the same source multiple times.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Sources and references evaluation
As virtual youtubers are a recent phenomena, it is understandable that the source section is somewhat lacking as many in academia have yet to discuss virtual youtubers in full. Despite this, I believe that there are better sources out there that this article does not utilize.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is very concise.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I am aware of.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes but the sections are a little short.

Organization evaluation
I believe that this article is very well organized, but as mentioned I believe that all of the sections can be expanded upon as they are lacking information.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * It includes one image that gives an example of a Virtual YouTuber but I believe that it should be expanded.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes the image is captioned and describes what is being portrayed.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes the image in question is fair use.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes it is laid out in the standard top right corner.

Images and media evaluation
The one image that this article has is quite good for giving a visual example of a popular Virtual YouTuber. However, I believe that a few more images are necessary to make the article more coherent.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Is the mentioning of Barbie relevant to the article? In addition, splitting a list of specific virtual Youtubers and their organizations into separate Wikipedia articles as well as a more in depth history of virtual youtubers that goes back to the 90s.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated as a start-class wikipedia article. It is part of the WikiProjects Youtube articles.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It is significantly less information dense.

Talk page evaluation
I believe that since this article is fairly recent, the talk page is not as extensive as other articles. Despite this, there is still a lot of quality discussion that is happening regarding this essay and the directions that it could potentially take in the future.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
I believe that the article in its current form gives a good framework of what VTubers are but still requires more in depth discussion on the history, rise in popularity, cultural aspects, as well as some of the "drama" that has been recently circulating involving vTubers.

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: