User:IntroToCom101 Schlerf/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Visual communication

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am evaluating the visual communication article on Wikipedia. I am a visual learner therefore I felt as though this would be the most interesting article for me.

Evaluate the article
Evaluation: Introduction- The introduction is brief and to the point while sharing the basic ideas around visual communication. There is no bias and there is no opinionated remarks. It is simply worded with simple sentence structure. The sentences are quite monotone but there is not a lot going on which makes it a good introduction. Overview- The overview dives deeper into the important characters, analysis, and visual aid media. It is well organized and perfectly lays out each one of the topics with a brief discussion of what they mean or do. It talks about each perspective and what they mean as well. It is hard to talk about these ideas ambiguously but this article does a good idea not letting them bleed together. The visual aid media goes into more detail and explains each aid in more depth. Components- This is the shortest and most basic section. It goes into the color and other components of visual media in an easy to read way. It talks about how different colors and styles interact with each other to create visual media. They do a good job objectively explaining. Prominence and motive- This section talks about all the different places where visual communication pops up in life today. This section does a good job bringing in a lot of sources. There is a part in Culture that brings in an unreliable source so obviously this is not good. They also bring in a large sections about the functions in politics. This does a good job at being unbiased and simply stating the facts. There is a bit of sloppy writing but otherwise its fairly well laid out Sources- The first source comes to a website with nothing just an error message so thats not good. The rest of the sources are good for the most part but one source was marked as unreliable.