User:JaseA15/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.) Sport communication careers - Wikipedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article because I have always been into sport for as long as I remember and wanted to see the connection with sports and communication. I have the last few years look into working for a sports organization after school and I thought this would be a very cool article to learn about how it connects to communication and maybe some possible career options as well. It is a very interesting topic with the amount of press and culture behind sport.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

To start, I thought the article gave a very good basis into the idea and sports communication. It started with a good into and served as a good intro article into this topic. My first problem with the article was that it was titled sports communication careers and hardly talked about actual career options in sports communication. It talked about a lot of different aspects of this topic but only really dove deep into the topic of photojournalism. I think this article could be significantly better if it would dive deeper into many different specific careers in sports communication and talk about those. Also, there was no photos until the last section of the article. While this does not play a huge role it would be nice to have a few more pictures or drawings throughout. I do think it would be very cool to dive into the aspect of sports culture in this article as well and talk about the huge culture in sports. They mention it in the beginning and then do not talk a ton about it after that. There also should defiantly be a conclusion wrapping it up. One good thing was the number of sources for this short of an article. Overall, I thought it was a good intro article into the topic but could be way better developed in many aspects to make it more complete.