User:Jaybreeze123/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1
'''This article demonstrates a concise overview of the topic by providing the history and reliability, but I feel there is room for additional information. Expanding on the Reliability section, I would search for citations that highlight the ways in which this topic has been researched and the role it has played in societies construction. When reviewing the "Talk" page, there is some discussion on whether or not one of the sources cited should be removed, along with the information it is associated with.'''
 * Article title
 * Marketplace of ideas
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources:

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Priming (media)
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article shares a solid amount of information on the topic of priming in regard to media. When reviewing the content, the copy is neutral and does a good job attaching reputable sources to each of the statements made on the topic. I would aim to dive deeper into the latest research and real-world applications that have been drawn through the studies that have been conducted in order to provide a broad perspective of the more recent data on priming in the media. The article's "Talk" page doesn't have any discussions currently taking place.
 * Sources:

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Sleeper effect
 * Article Evaluation
 * I found this article to be interesting because I have never heard of the sleeper effect before. From my perspective, this article already covers a ton of information, but I noticed it was last edited in November of 2022. This lends me to think that there may be more recent studies or discussion on the role of the sleeper effect in society. I also would reorganize the order in which the information is shared to improve the comprehension of the reader. I did notice some copy that comes across as a personal opinion. For example, this sentence in the final section of the article, "Something that Hovland and his team ignored that is important is why over time, the discounting cue becomes less accessible than the message even when both pieces are similarly effective at the onset." This statement was not associated with a specific citation. This also might be a little nit-picky. The article's "Talk" page has no discussions at this time.
 * Sources:

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Pluralistic ignorance
 * Article Evaluation
 * I feel this article would be interesting to tackle because it shares a lot of information that is seemingly from reputative sources, but it is formatted in a way that is not conducive with high-level comprehension. I would be interested to learn more about this topic to better formulate the information already available, while also adding additional content that helps bolster the thoroughness of the article's coverage. The article's "Talk" page does have some discussion on whether or not a certain statement should be removed because of the lack of a reputable source. There were also some comments disagree with content that was properly sourced from a personal standpoint. I could see this article involving interaction from other individuals.
 * Sources:

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Media richness theory
 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is ranked as intermediate with room for improvement which means that I would more so be looking to "clean" up the article by removing non-neutral content, removing statements with non-reputable sources or no sources at all, and formatting the information in a way that maximizes readability and comprehension. I feel this is a topic that I would enjoy research about, but it also would require less work on my part. The current format of the article seems very high level and it was recently edited, implying that the information is most likely recent. Based on the article's "Talk" page, the article has undergone some significant changes/edits since its creation and there are multiple discussions involving where the article should go at this point. I noticed one user suggested the creation of a criticism section if a student was using the article for a course assignment. This would most likely be where I would focus the bulk of my time/contribution.
 * Sources: