User:Izzyseverns/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: Multimedia Studies
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because it is an article I am interested and can personally relate to.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes "Multimedia Studies is an interdisciplinary field of academic discourse focused on the understanding of technologies and cultural dimensions of linking traditional media sources with ones based on new media to support social systems."
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, 6 sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No all that is in the lead is in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I believe it is detailed, but could be a bit more concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, all the content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The most recent reference his from 2008, so could be more up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes the article is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * "Concepts like emotional design  and affective computing  are driving Multimedia Studies research to consider ways of becoming more seductive and able to take account of the different needs of users." This was the only statement that I thought was bias.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No viewpoints
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No just states facts.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, there is over 20 references for a 6 section page.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, all relative.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources could be more current then they are.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All 3 links I checked worked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * A bit bland, but easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I found
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Could be a bit longer, but organized well.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No images included
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * NA
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * NA
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * NA

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Conversations regarding the links, a few were broken but were fixed.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Start-Class
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This is on the older end, in class we talk more regarding new media.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I feel the overall status of the page is good. Could make some improvements.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The articles strengths were the facts and references. It was well written and had links to backup all factual evidence.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think the article could be improved by creating an easier to read piece. Adding more pictures and interesting, surprising facts.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I feel the article is complete on some levels. It could have a bit more information and add some more insight on new updates.

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: