User:DeLuca10598/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: Mobile media
 * I chose this article because not only is it very relatable to the class and our society today, but I think that there is a decent amount of information that I can add to make the wikipedia page more efficient.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

1) The Lead does include an introductory sentence but it only explains when mobile media was first "thought of".

2) The Lead doesn't give a brief description of any of the sections. Matter of fact, there are not even any sections in this article.

3) The Lead doesn't include any information at all that is present in the article.

4) The Lead is some-what concise but very minimal information about the article itself.


 * 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

1) The article's content is definitely relevant to the topic, but needs more content.

2) The content is some-what up to date, needs to have more up to date information.

3) I don't think that there is content that doesn't belong, I think that the article could use more up to date information, a broad definition of mobile media, adding sections to the article and the more kinds of media.

4) The article doesn't deal with any of the Wikipedia's equity gaps. The article also doesn't deal with underrepresented topics.


 * 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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

1) Yes the article is neutral.

2) There are no claims that appear to be heavily biased.

3) With the information that is present, there aren't any viewpoints that are over or underrepresented.

4) The article doesn't seem to persuade the reader in anyway.


 * 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

1) All of the information that is given is backed up by reliable source.

2) The sources are thorough and reflect the literature on the topic.

3) Yes all of the sources are current, from 2004 on.

4)The sources aren't written by a diverse spectrum of authors. The article includes three white males and one white female.

5) The links I checked all worked.


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

1) From the information given, the article is a little concise, but is clear and easy to read.

2) Other than a couple run on sentences, there isn't any grammatical or spelling errors.

3) The article isn't broken down into sections at all, it is just separated with paragraphs.


 * 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

1) The article does include one image.

2) With only one picture, it is well-captioned to describe that information.

3) The one picture does adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.

4) The one image definitely is laid out in a visually appealing way.


 * 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

1) I think that if any conversations are being had behind the scenes, they are discussing more reliable sources to use and also how mobile media is more and more relevant in today's society each day.

2) This article is part of the Wikimedia project.

3) This topic is discussed differently from in class because we would discuss mobile media in terms of not only its technological affect but its cultural affect on the world.


 * 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

1) I think that overall, the article's status is off to a good start at describing mobile media.

2) The articles strength include good reliable sources, a good photo and explaining the beginning of mobile media in the world.

3) The article can be improved with adding sections to break up the article, have a better lead, add more diverse reliable sources and add more recent knowledge about mobile media.

4) I think that article is underdeveloped.


 * 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: Talk:Mobile media